As we hear in the news every day, anthropogenic (human caused) global climate change is real, despite the efforts by some to call it a hoax. It is the most serious result of our species fouling our home planet. It, and all other human caused pollution, can be traced back to our unchecked population expansion and "need" for more and better things. We are caught in a trap of our own making.
The problem is multifaceted, although relatively simple in concept. More people equals more demands on resources, especially arable lands, water and fisheries. More and more oil and gas, coal, metals and other minerals are being pumped or mined to meet the demand for energy or materials. Wildlife is being killed off or removed for ivory, folk medicine, trophies or exotic pets. More demand creates huge markets for such commodities as fish, leading to overfishing in a classic tragedy of the commons. Even by-catch is becoming a commodity because salable materials, such as live sea shells, are often scrounged for processing into specimen shells for private collectors. Sometimes these are not actually by-catch, and one dealer seems to have actually bragged in a catalog several years ago that he was taking advantage of the rebellion on the south Philippines to dredge the reefs for salable shells, such as Conus glorimaris, without government scrutiny or need for permits! This is a microcosm of a greater problem, but every destructive act leaves coral reefs and their associated biota in danger. In addition the reefs are being searched for salable marine fish for the affluent aquarist. Even worse, reefs, including Australia's Great Barrier Reef, have been suggested as dumping grounds for land waste! The situation is equally dire on land.
Population increases and the resulting demand for land, water and other resources, especially for the affluent developed countries and the up and coming countries like China, are the cause of our problems with climate change. The system almost requires us to use gasoline, plastics, and on and on, unless you are able to retire on a backwoods acreage with no electricity from the power company, your own water supply and a very large garden and storage barn. Even then you would probably need a car and visits to the doctor as well. Bicycles requite metals and plastics, as do solar panels and wiring. In addition, as population increases, there are more and more demands for places to dump solid wastes and much is dumped into the sea and along back roads. In essence we are trapped in a never ending capitalistic pyramid scheme that will result in our complete ruin unless we modify or replace it.
The current political push to curtail abortion and even birth control also works against our future. In many cases women in the developing world are left with few alternatives, but few right to life politicians have any sympathy. Whether that is because they have some religious bias, are misogynistic, want to promote the production of more consumers and workers to feed the system, believe in the ultimate perfectibility of the human species, or are clueless, or a combination of those reasons, is a question for debate, but the results are the same.
When I was much younger and first encountered wild areas I found that my sympathy for the natural world was not shared by those who believed in human "progress." That "progress" was rubbed in my face as I saw large chunks of the Sonoran Desert scraped clean to put in new housing developments and trailer parks. Later, in Southeast New Mexico I saw the results of the large scale oil development in the Permian Basin and was told that the smell of hydrogen sulfide was the smell of money. Indeed, I had an automobile, lived in a house, used electricity produced by fossil fuel, used plastics, bought and consumed meat and vegetables produced by destructive agro-business, and even the books I read were the result of either pulp wood plantations or clear cutting of forests. I could not complain as I was as guilty as anybody else. In truth those who told me this had a point, but as I have said this is because we are enmeshed in the corporate world to such a degree that it is nearly impossible to have no negative impact. Multiply that by 7 billion people, and you can rapidly see, assuming one is not blinded by the picture of potential human riches projected by our capitalistic society, that ruin is not far away.
What is the answer for this dilemma? I wish I knew, but I do know that cutting off funding for family planning is foolish. Two actions could help the population problem -- give women more power and financial resources apart from their husbands, fathers and brothers, and make birth control and proper health care for women more easily accessible. Also, we desperately need to break our dependance on non-renewable energy sources. In some ways things are getting better, but the dirty fuel industry is fighting back and has kept us from addressing the threat effectively for at least the last 20 years. Another action that would help would be building a network of natural habitats (not necessarily pristine old growth because that is getting rarer) connected by corridors easily accessible to larger wildlife. The main point is to save as much of the biota as possible, while also protecting natural watersheds and carbon sinks, like forests and areas of high phytoplanktonic (one-celled photosynthesizing organisms) production in the ocean and other aquatic systems. People would just have to get used to wolves, coyotes, pumas, owls, etc. and having some areas of wild dense forest, mountains, desert, coasts, and open ocean off limits to commercial fishing. This would, of course, require a projected reduction of population, which I think could be accomplished democratically at least to a degree by the first two actions I mentioned. I am of the opinion that we simply cannot accommodate 11 or 12 billion people on this planet without dire consequences to many, if not most or all, of the people (See: http://www.theguardian.com/... http://www.kstatecollegian.com/... and http://www.utne.com/....) With 7 billion we are already seeing wars that have the potential for becoming perpetual, like those in Orwell's "1984." The Syrian civil war (caused in part by drought) is a case in point. If this is progress, send me back to the stone age! No, I like many of our technological advances (we do seem to "progress" in that, but certainly not as much in social issues) like modern medicine too much to give them up, but I think that we have to be smarter in how we apply these innovations. Technology should serve our grandchildren's future, not our greed.
Still, questions about exponential growth are occasionally being raised (See: http://www.bbc.com/... for example) and there are numerous references on the Internet (See the BBC article and others above) and in print. I would like there to be a solution, even if it means simplifying my life style considerably, but so far I don't see it happening. Once global climate change really kicks in I don't think we will have much choice in the matter and unfortunately Malthus may prove to be right and disease, war, and starvation may reduce our population without our consent! There is some hope, but it is getting very thin, especially with the attacks on family planning so beloved of conservative politicians.