The last couple of decades have found me contemplating peak oil, global heating, biodiversity loss, etc, etc. One of the subjects that keeps cropping up is "sustainability" the meaning of which seems to have been perverted to support just about any view. The latest bizarre definition of sustainable comes from Hannah Ritchie who, in a TED talk, defines it as a lower footprint and a better standard of living for all. The definition has nothing to do which what can be maintained indefinitely, the true meaning of sustainable. Thus, it seems we just make up stuff to rationalise what we want to do.

My decades long consideration of these things has lead me to a basic truth (at least that's my current opinion; I'd love to be wrong): Humans are a species.

Since humans are a species, we can't expect them to act in a non-species way. Actually, there is no hard and fast definition of a species and evolution acts on individuals, not species, but the idea is convenient because we know individuals may act in odd ways that other members of the species don't. But this is how evolution works. Random mutation, filtered by some selection mechanism (usually, natural selection). A genetic mutation which gives the individual an advantage in survival and reproduction will tend to spread through the species and may result in a new species, over deep time. So the genes are only concerned with the now, get an advantage now, not in some mythical future, which can't be known. The primary resource for most organisms is food but other resources are used in different ways to make a life (e.g. for nest making) and gain an advantage.

So all species will access resources as quickly as they can.  Where useful resources are easy pickings, the species will thrive until some critical resource depletes. Then a different set of mutations may make some individuals able to make better use of what's available or move to find more. Humans are no different, except that they are far better at accessing resources than other extant species. So the boom in numbers that we see when useful resources become apparently abundant is to be expected.

If a species learns that accessing and using resources in a certain way may have a long term detrimental effect on their survival, what do they do? Nothing! They continue to act like a species, living for now, not a future that is uncertain. They can't act any other way. So denial of reality is really just a rationalisation of behaviour they have no real control over. Where individuals try to limit their resource use (e.g. by not having babies or not flying) their genes are less likely to be passed on. A species will never be dominated by genes that inhibit reproduction and resource use.

So some of us can be horrified by the inaction of most people to rein in their resource use but it makes no difference; humans will continue to act like a species.

So modernity will end, as it is unsustainable. This seems obvious to some but still most people want to somehow save the nice bits of modernity. There are no nice bits, so far as nature is concerned. We've never really learned that you can't do just one thing. There are always consequences. Since modernity is unsustainable, the best we can do is recycle as much as possible as our societies inevitably contract and simplify. Eventually, the only sustainable way of living is to consume renewable resources. No-one will like this. So-called renewable energy can't come riding to the rescue, since it isn't sustainable.

There will be some future species (or possibly some remnants of ours) which will try to do the same things that we did, 10,000 years ago. They won't have fossil fuels to accelerate their civilisations but there will be unsustainable civilisations in future, unless humans become extinct and no other species arises with similar abilities.

Nature is a cruel place, contrary to hope of living in harmony with nature. Most wild creatures would die a horrible death, eaten by predators or killed by disease and injuries. That was the lot of humans, also until fairly recently but it will the lot of increasing numbers of humans.

The only real question is how long will it take for the resource and environmental problems we've created really bite home and make the inevitable decline of our species obvious?

Is this reality?