Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on May 1, 2016
Human Extinction Isn’t That Unlikely
These are the most viable threats to globally organized civilization. They’re the stuff of nightmares and blockbusters—but unlike sea monsters or zombie viruses, they’re real, part of the calculus that political leaders consider everyday. And according to a new report from the U.K.-based Global Challenges Foundation, they’re much more likely than we might think.
In its annual report on “global catastrophic risk,” the nonprofit debuted a startling statistic: Across the span of their lives, the average American is more than five times likelier to die during a human-extinction event than in a car crash.
Partly that’s because the average person will probably not die in an automobile accident. Every year, one in 9,395 people die in a crash; that translates to about a 0.01 percent chance per year. But that chance compounds over the course of a lifetime. At life-long scales, one in 120 Americans die in an accident.
And that number probably underestimates the risk of dying in any global cataclysm. The Stern Review, whose math suggests the 9.5-percent number, only calculated the danger of species-wide extinction. The Global Challenges Foundation’s report is concerned with all events that would wipe out more than 10 percent of Earth’s human population.
“We don’t expect any of the events that we describe to happen in any 10-year period. They might—but, on balance, they probably won’t,” Sebastian Farquhar, the director of the Global Priorities Project, told me. “But there’s lots of events that we think are unlikely that we still prepare for.”
For instance, most people demand working airbags in their cars and they strap in their seat-belts whenever they go for a drive, he said. We may know that the risk of an accident on any individual car ride is low, but we still believe that it makes sense to reduce possible harm.
So what kind of human-level extinction events are these? The report holds catastrophic climate change and nuclear war far above the rest, and for good reason. On the latter front, it cites multiple occasions when the world stood on the brink of atomic annihilation. While most of these occurred during the Cold War, another took place during the 1990s, the most peaceful decade in recent memory:
In 1995, Russian systems mistook a Norwegian weather rocket for a potential nuclear attack. Russian President Boris Yeltsin retrieved launch codes and had the nuclear suitcase open in front of him. Thankfully, Russian leaders decided the incident was a false alarm.
Climate change also poses its own risks. As I’ve written about before, serious veterans of climate science now suggest that global warming will spawn continent-sized superstorms by the end of the century. Farquhar said that even more conservative estimates can be alarming: UN-approved climate models estimate that the risk of six to ten degrees Celsius of warming exceeds 3 percent, even if the world tamps down carbon emissions at a fast pace. “On a more plausible emissions scenario, we’re looking at a 10-percent risk,” Farquhar said. Few climate adaption scenarios account for swings in global temperature this enormous.
Yet natural pandemics may pose the most serious risks of all. In fact, in the past two millennia, the only two events that experts can certify as global catastrophes of this scale were plagues. The Black Death of the 1340s felled more than 10 percent of the world population. Eight centuries prior, another epidemic of the Yersinia pestis bacterium—the “Great Plague of Justinian” in 541 and 542—killed between 25 and 33 million people, or between 13 and 17 percent of the global population at that time.
No event approached these totals in the 20th century. The twin wars did not come close: About 1 percent of the global population perished in the Great War, about 3 percent in World War II. Only the Spanish flu epidemic of the late 1910s, which killed between 2.5 and 5 percent of the world’s people, approached the medieval plagues. Farquhar said there’s some evidence that the First World War and Spanish influenza were the same catastrophic global event—but even then, the death toll only came to about 6 percent of humanity.
The report briefly explores other possible risks: a genetically engineered pandemic, geo-engineering gone awry, an all-seeing artificial intelligence. Unlike nuclear war or global warming, though, the report clarifies that these remain mostly notional threats, even as it cautions:
[N]early all of the most threatening global catastrophic risks were unforeseeable a few decades before they became apparent. Forty years before the discovery of the nuclear bomb, few could have predicted that nuclear weapons would come to be one of the leading global catastrophic risks. Immediately after the Second World War, few could have known that catastrophic climate change, biotechnology, and artificial intelligence would come to pose such a significant threat.
So what’s the societal version of an airbag and seatbelt? Farquhar conceded that many existential risks were best handled by policies catered to the specific issue, like reducing stockpiles of warheads or cutting greenhouse-gas emissions. But civilization could generally increase its resilience if it developed technology to rapidly accelerate food production. If technical society had the power to ramp-up less sunlight-dependent food sources, especially, there would be a “lower chance that a particulate winter [from a volcano or nuclear war] would have catastrophic consequences.”
He also thought many problems could be helped if democratic institutions had some kind of ombudsman or committee to represent the interests of future generations. (This strikes me as a distinctly European proposal—in the United States, the national politics of a “representative of future generations” would be thrown off by the abortion debate and unborn personhood, I think.)
The report was a joint project of the Centre for Effective Altruism in London and the Future of Humanity Institute at the University of Oxford. It can be read online.
68 Comments on "Human Extinction Isn’t That Unlikely"
onlooker on Sun, 1st May 2016 3:02 pm
We are certainly creating conditions ripe for our extinction and the extinction of most higher life forms.
apneaman on Sun, 1st May 2016 3:08 pm
Sill a downplaying puff piece. The hour is much later. Which is good.
Survivakist on Sun, 1st May 2016 3:15 pm
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saudi-arabia-workers-set-fire-to-buses-after-50000-sacked-and-salaries-not-paid-a7008931.html
Hawkcreek on Sun, 1st May 2016 3:40 pm
Why even use the word “extinction” if they are only going to talk about a few dinky little threats that only kill a few percent of the population.
I agree, a puff piece. Can’t scare the sheep – they could stampede.
apneaman on Sun, 1st May 2016 3:40 pm
300 Die in India Heatwave, Thailand and Laos Smash Heat Records
http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/300-Die-in-India-Heatwave-Thailand-and-Laos-Smash-Heat-Records-20160430-0019.html
apneaman on Sun, 1st May 2016 3:46 pm
Armed guards at India dams as drought leaves farmers dry
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-3567803/Armed-guards-India-dams-drought-leaves-farmers-dry.html
apneaman on Sun, 1st May 2016 3:49 pm
Planet cancer
Hanoi under a polluted cloud
http://english.vietnamnet.vn/fms/environment/154465/hanoi-under-a-polluted-cloud.html
Boat on Sun, 1st May 2016 3:54 pm
Human Extinction Isn’t That Unlikely. Neither is alien abduction. Just ask those who have been picked up.
onlooker on Sun, 1st May 2016 3:59 pm
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/Default.aspx?pageID=449&nID=98444&NewsCatID=418
Non-linear climate emergency
apneaman on Sun, 1st May 2016 4:00 pm
No one does cancer like the fossil fueled frackers.
Study: US oil field source of global uptick in air pollution
“The team led by researchers at the University of Michigan found that fossil fuel production at the Bakken Formation in North Dakota and Montana is emitting roughly 2 per cent of the ethane detected in the Earth’s atmosphere.
Along with its chemical cousin methane, ethane is a hydrocarbon that is a significant component of natural gas. Once in the atmosphere, ethane reacts with sunlight to form ozone, which can trigger asthma attacks and other respiratory problems, especially in children and the elderly. Ethane pollution can also harm agricultural crops. Ozone also ranks as the third−largest contributor to human−caused global warming after carbon dioxide and methane.
“We didn’t expect one region to have such a global influence,” said Eric Kort, lead author of the study and an assistant professor of climatic science at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor.”
http://www.nationalobserver.com/2016/04/30/news/study-us-oil-field-source-global-uptick-air-pollution
apneaman on Sun, 1st May 2016 4:05 pm
Not to be out done, a tribe of humans from the geographically designated region refereed to as Canada (sub region Northern Alberta) announce cancer expansion plans of their own.
Suncor on Expansion Spree in Down Oilpatch
Calgary giant aims to be ‘last oil company standing’ as world shifts off carbon, its CEO says.
“Canada’s largest oil sands producer, Suncor, appeared to take a sharp turn on climate change when it announced to an annual meeting of its investors in Calgary on Thursday that it will dramatically boost oil production, despite facing the lowest oil prices in a generation.”
http://thetyee.ca/News/2016/04/29/Suncor-Expansion-Spree/
peakyeast on Sun, 1st May 2016 4:10 pm
@boat: Look at this video…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIEokJ_ZxKE
apneaman on Sun, 1st May 2016 4:16 pm
Boat, extinction is the rule on this planet – probably any planet with life.
There have been 14 extinction periods on this planet. 5 of them mass extinctions. That means 50% or more little boaty. The 6th mass extinction is well under way. Boaty, they all have one thing in common. Do you know what it is little cancer monkey?
apneaman on Sun, 1st May 2016 4:19 pm
Another link between CO2 and mass extinctions of species
http://theconversation.com/another-link-between-co2-and-mass-extinctions-of-species-12906
apneaman on Sun, 1st May 2016 4:20 pm
Great Dying 252 million years ago coincided with CO2 build-up
http://earthsky.org/earth/great-dying-252-million-years-ago-concided-with-co2-build-up
peakyeast on Sun, 1st May 2016 4:21 pm
Re: India drought “we pray to the rain gods to forgive us”…
It wont work – you have to be at least twice as many people before the god listens to you.
apneaman on Sun, 1st May 2016 4:31 pm
“Four of Earth’s Five Mass Extinctions Caused by Global Warming” –99.9 % of All Species that Existed Vanished
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2014/08/four-of-earths-five-mass-extictions-caused-by-global-warming-999-of-all-species-that-existed-vanishe.html
Boat on Sun, 1st May 2016 4:42 pm
peak,
That was insane he got up.
peakyeast on Sun, 1st May 2016 4:57 pm
Its on par with alien abductions 😀
makati1 on Sun, 1st May 2016 5:32 pm
Another fluff piece that equates air bags with mass extinction, with the usual “IF only … get out of extinction free card” at the end.
apneaman on Sun, 1st May 2016 5:55 pm
Boat was abducted by aliens once. Not extraterrestrials – illegals – from El Salvador. They took turns anally probing him and he has never recovered.
Davy on Sun, 1st May 2016 6:47 pm
I think the extinction talk is missing the point and who cares. When you are dead you are dead. When the species is dead it is gone. Do you think a possum will give a shit? no.
The bigger issues is the population and consumption rebalance that will almost surely happen soon enough. How, when, where, how much and how long are the unknown issues.
We are setting ourselves up for a multigenerational die off and yes maybe extinction. Yet, extinction is probably a much longer term issues where a realized bottleneck situation of excess death over births of let’s say 200MIL a year is very likely to begin within a decade or less. In fact I would say it is required and necessary. I am not saying this as a person that wants something to happen. This required and necessary is per natural law and the natural order of things.
We can face this existential epic change in a variety of ways. We can kill and be killed or we can share and prepare but there is no avoiding this. The sooner we enter a crisis of destructive change the better. If we decide to joyride until the end fine but we will pay our dues one way or another.
As for me, I am sick and tired of this horrible life we modern humans have created. I look forward to this way of life being turned on its head but I want this to happen slower with a softer landing.
This will likely start as a global phenomenon and lapse into a regional and local phenomenon. I say that because once the grid destabilizes our 24/7/365 world will dissolve like butter on a hot day. When once we read about happenings in the Middle East soon we will be hearing about our neighbors. Life needs to shrink. Humans should never have grown to what we are today. There is nothing harmonious about modern humans. There is nothing honorable. There is nothing majestic. We have destroyed those things instead.
onlooker on Sun, 1st May 2016 7:22 pm
“There is nothing harmonious about modern humans. There is nothing honorable. There is nothing majestic. We have destroyed those things instead.”
Well said, I think all of us can pretty much agree on that
JuanP on Sun, 1st May 2016 8:08 pm
Human extinction is a complete certainty. Nobody knows when it will happen and I don’t think it matters. What I am 100% certain of is that our current civilization, population, and consumption are unsustainable.
If you have a house you can defend, stored food, and a water cistern then you are better prepared than most. A nuclear conflict in the short or medium term future is becoming increasingly likely, particularly in the Northern Hemisphere. Climate Change is everywhere now and it is here to stay and it will be a real whopper.
Shelter, food, water, community, staying fit and healthy, and whatnot. We can expect every decade to be worse than the one before for the rest of our lives. We spent the afternoon volunteering at a local organic farm coop today.
sidzepp on Sun, 1st May 2016 8:39 pm
Perhaps an all-out nuclear war is the answer. It will create nuclear winter and kill of a lot of life, but more than likely eliminate homo sapien-sapien from the mix and new evolutionary trends will evolve.
apneaman on Sun, 1st May 2016 8:44 pm
Jaun, yabut if there is a nuclear war the global warming will be canceled for thousands of years. I wonder what it would be like to survive that?
http://putmv.com/watch/the-road-2009
ghung on Sun, 1st May 2016 10:01 pm
Boat said; “Human Extinction Isn’t That Unlikely. Neither is alien abduction. Just ask those who have been picked up.”
Hey, Boat, when they took you up in their spaceship, did they do any sexual things to you? That would explain a lot.
freak on Mon, 2nd May 2016 1:32 am
“The Newsroom” which aired on HBO and was canceled 12/2014 says all we need to know on climate change. There is nothing else to say.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XM0uZ9mfOUI
theedrich on Mon, 2nd May 2016 4:19 am
But all politics is local. Not only in space but also in time. There is no chance America will do anything about the massive threat of extinction growing every day. Among other things, journalist Ted Koppel has recently published a book, “Lights Out,” which shows that the chances are increasing yearly that teams of hackers (think ISIL), or even individuals, could before long destroy the entire American electrical grid, resulting in the shutdown and death of the nation without any clear idea of who or where the attacking agent was. And yet, our “leaders” are making absolutely no effort to deal with this extremely serious threat, either by defending against it or by planning for any reaction to it. Other things, like accepting and coddling the tsunamis of melanin-enhanced ThirdWorldlings (i.e., undocumented Democrats), are more important.
If anything shows that American democracy is a bribe-ocratic farce, the very real and expanding threat of massive extinction is it. But according to our masters, “racism” is far worse than White genosuicide. Just ask the Demonic Party’s frontrunning vixen — or, in Europe, Frau Doktorin Angela Merkel.
Dredd on Mon, 2nd May 2016 7:11 am
Trouble in Pretendadise (The 1.14% 1% vs. The 100% – 3).
dave thompson on Mon, 2nd May 2016 8:25 am
Copy paste and post this notice to the people. There is a new social activist movement, called “SHUT IT DOWN”. Wherein we the people, shut the system down by, staying home from work, not spending any money we can SHUT IT DOWN. The economy as is, is teetering on the brink, with zero to no growth and it would not take much to SHUT IT DOWN. We the people can do this with out any demonstrating or window breaking, we all just stay home and SHUT IT DOWN. The PTB cannot send out riot troops, they cannot teargas us, the PTB will be defenseless when we stay home spending no money and SHUT IT DOWN. Join now and SHUT IT DOWN!
geopressure on Mon, 2nd May 2016 8:41 am
Holy Fuck, Dave Thompson… Are you fucking crazy??? Do you work for the Obama Administration???
onlooker on Mon, 2nd May 2016 8:45 am
I do not know Dave, it becomes a game of who blinks first like a siege also. They the Elite wait till some of us die and basically they feel we will at some point crack and want their leadership. The trick is to be ready with new people to take over who command the respect of the people and get all the enablers, technicians etc back to work so the lights come back on and food is delivered. Then we can think of weaning ourselves off the infrastructure and matrix of fossil fuels and top down dictatorship.
geopressure on Mon, 2nd May 2016 8:47 am
Dave Thompson…
If you have any savings, 401k, or IRA, then you are a fucking retard posting shit like that…
—
This is exactly the kind of shit that is going to start going down when we finally get to the point that there isn’t enough oil to keep the gas stations supplied…
Obama will resort to extreme measures like this to decrease fuel demand…
Kenz300 on Mon, 2nd May 2016 8:57 am
Extinction events around the corner………..
CLIMATE CHANGE, declining fish stocks, droughts, floods, air water and land pollution, poverty, water and food shortages all stem from the worlds worst environmental problem……. OVER POPULATION.
Yet the world adds 80 million more mouths to feed, clothe, house and provide energy and water for every year… this is unsustainable… and is a big part of the Climate Change problem
Birth Control Permanent Methods: Learn About Effectiveness
http://www.emedicinehealth.com/birth_control_permanent_methods/article_em.htm
dave thompson on Mon, 2nd May 2016 8:59 am
You all catch on quick, Yea Geo, I got all that and more to lose. The choice is over, we the people WILL SHUT IT DOWN!
GregT on Mon, 2nd May 2016 9:07 am
Voluntarily or not, the system will eventually shut down. Savings, 401Ks, and pension funds, are all being cannibalized as we speak. Expecting the trends to magically reverse themselves as time goes on would seem to me to be a tad overly optimistic.
makati1 on Mon, 2nd May 2016 9:07 am
dave, I agree. The sooner it is all shut down the better for the world at large. Kill the government and the military industrial complex and wall street. Start over with the pieces.
geopressure on Mon, 2nd May 2016 9:09 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bYAQ-ZZtEU
Dredd on Mon, 2nd May 2016 9:15 am
You are 9,520 times more likely to die from human extinction caused by fossil fuel pollution than by a terrorist (The 1.14% 1% vs. The 100% – 3).
dave thompson on Mon, 2nd May 2016 9:19 am
geo, this is not a fake astro turf movement this is real. We the people do not need to do much, if 10-20% of the people stay home for a week off work in all walks of life, spending no money, the system will crumble and fold. It is now SHUT IT DOWN!
Davy on Mon, 2nd May 2016 9:25 am
Dave, this is what I have been advocating and that is forced crisis that will force changes to poor and dangerous lifestyles and attitudes. I caution you though this “shut it down” will lead to loss of life. Do not kid yourself that anything good will come of it in that regards. I would say less bad will come from it is the best you can do as opposed to status quo.
Ideally we need to restrict fossil fuels. That is a sure fire way to force localization and destroy globalism. That is an ideal because the PTB would never agree to it and would probably never find common agreement to “turn the switch off”. Oil is that switch.
This switch will go off per peak oil dynamics but in a random and chaotic way without a managment of some sort. Ideally we should at least have systems and structures in place to handle the coming shortages of food and fuel. Currently there is nothing. I have been researching this for years now and the best that I have seen was Hirsch’s book from a few years back “The Definitive Guide to the Coming Energy Crisis”. At least one of his chapters talk about how to ration and distribute liquid fuels in a crisis. BTW, any method is fought with problems and complications.
Davy on Mon, 2nd May 2016 9:31 am
Dave it is true a 10%-20% figure would shut down society but keep in mind it is the critical part of society that can do this and I doubt they are going to participate to the degree you need in the time frame referenced. Just like any other movements we have seen they have a time line of effectiveness. They have a period of maximum impact then they usually fizzle out.
Longer term just the huge unemployed and disenfranchised populations are going to bring the system down anyway but this could take years. Something will kill globalism and the status quo but it is not clear what yet and at what speed.
PracticalMaina on Mon, 2nd May 2016 9:41 am
Whether or not we see a near term apocolypse, I can say with 100% certainty we will continue to poison ourselves and future generations.
http://nhv.us/content/16055876-new-study-links-aerial-pesticide-spraying-autism
dave thompson on Mon, 2nd May 2016 9:44 am
All of you make good points, however this movement has started, more and more are joining. SHUT IT DOWN will not be stopped it is to late. The PTB cannot stop it, how do they think they can pepper spray us in our own homes minding our own biz?
Revi on Mon, 2nd May 2016 9:57 am
I don’t think you will have to do it. There are lots of people around here who aren’t buying anything now. A lot of people are doing exactly what you are advocating, but not because of some movement. They are sitting in their houses because they are unemployed or disabled. The labor force participation is at it’s lowest in about 50 years. Every sixth house is unoccupied. Look around. It’s happening already.
GregT on Mon, 2nd May 2016 10:05 am
The problem as I see it Dave, is as follows. If the 10-20% shut down the system that 5-10% of the world’s populations currently enjoy, the other 80-90% of the world’s populations will quickly rise up in their place. This is a global problem, not a problem that can be solved by the world’s 1 percenters. (Us) Somehow I don’t see the 99% who are aspiring to live like we do, returning back to the family farms just because we have ‘shut it down’. Don’t get me wrong. I agree with what you are saying. The system is rotten to the core, and is not sustainable, but unfortunately I don’t see shutting down the West as solving much of anything.
peakyeast on Mon, 2nd May 2016 10:23 am
Shut it down – and we will have food riots in a few days – if not immediately.
dave thompson on Mon, 2nd May 2016 10:31 am
SHUT IT DOWN and the PTB will be in fear of the people. Let the people decide. It is so simple it boggles the mind. Take your pick, the unintended consequences of mother nature? Or to SHUT IT DOWN! Stay home off your job for a week do not spend any money, WE THE PEOPLE WILL SHUT IT DOWN. The reset might be a bit of a challenge but what have we got to lose by staying home and not spending money?
Jerry McManus on Mon, 2nd May 2016 10:37 am
Hang on a mo’… Seriously now, I thought we, as in the human race, we are the catastrophe and it everything else that is going extinct. No?