Bring on the sea monsters, my car needs a fill-up

I came across an article recently called The Winds of War, The Sands of Time, that made an interesting statement: “we are actually living in the most peaceful time ever in human history”. As proof, the writer lists a series of major conflicts with more than a million deaths since World War II, all of which are over.

Unfortunately for his premise, the last war he showcases is the Second Congo War, which killed 3.8 million people and didn’t end until 2002, just four years ago. Four years seems far too short to make the claim that this is a “peaceful time”, especially given the constant news of war and violence from around the world and particularly the Middle East (as well as the ongoing violence in Congo, for that matter).

But there is more to his article than this claim, and some of it is quite interesting:

[N]ever have two democratic countries, with per-capita GDPs greater than $10,000/year, gone to war with each other. The decline in warfare in Europe and Asia corelates closely with multiple countries meeting these two conditions over the last few decades, and this can continue as more countries graduate to this standard of freedom and wealth.

If you’re not familiar with economic terms, GDP stands for gross domestic product, which can be thought of as the value produced by a given country – put more simply, rich countries have a high GDP.

What he’s saying is that rich, democratic countries don’t go to war with each other, which in the last century appears to be true, and that they won’t go to war with each other in the future, which I think is naive. But whether or not he’s right, there’s a refreshing optimism to the idea that appeals to me.

I’m finding it a little hard to be globally optimistic lately, as in, optimistic about Planet Earth and all of us critters who live on it. I still feel personally optimistic about losing my hint of a beer belly. I still feel financially optimistic that some day, I might be out of debt. Earth, though? Humanity in general? Not getting such a good feeling lately.

There’s no need for me to run through the list of reasons why we’re probably screwed, since you’re already aware of them yourself. That, or you’re in denial, which means I’m unlikely to get through to you any more effectively than all the other people you’ve successfully ignored. Instead, let’s take a look at one of our latest, greatest solutions to one of our most pressing problems: not enough oil to go around.

The solution, some are telling us, is biofuels. Biofuels are fuels derived from recently dead stuff, typically plants like corn, soybeans, straw, flaxseed and hemp, as well as sewage, wood and other biologically derived materials.

Yes, this means you can theoretically drive your car on meat, but it’s far more cost-effective (among other benefits) to use fast-growing plants like corn instead. That means expanding or diverting agricultural production to growing crops for fuel instead of crops for food.

It also means creating a whole new list of problems like deforestation, the many ill effects of pesticides, and of course, the ethical issues of using food for fuel while people starve. There is also at least one problem that borders on the fantastic: the rise of primitive organisms in our oceans.

On July 30, the Los Angeles Times published a story right out of a science fiction novel. A Primeval Tide of Toxins tells how basic nutrients like “nitrogen, carbon, iron and phosphorous compounds” from fertilizer and other sources are reverting our oceans to the “primeval seas of hundreds of millions of years ago”.

When our “solutions” to the coming energy crisis create massive swarms of jellyfish that clog nuclear power plant intakes, toxic cyanobacteria that burn and choke fishermen, and foul-smelling algae and bacteria goo that coats beaches in blobs bigger than humans, it’s no wonder I’m a little less-than-optimistic lately!

[tags]environment, war, politics, futurism, energy[/tags]