As always, humans depend on our natural world. Despite all of our technological advances, we still rely on physical, chemical and biological processes beyond our control, and which we only partially understand. And yet, we progress, thanks to technology. Ever since humans began using tools and planting crops, technology has become increasingly integral to human civilization and survival. Humans would not be the same without technology; civilization would collapse and most of us would soon die. In short, we need nature and technology. Managing these needs is a balancing act. If we fail in either direction, then society will be set back many generations. Now, as much as ever, we need to balance technology and nature so that civilization can continue to exist and advance.
The past does not guarantee a future
Much of our technological civilization rests on a foundation of a consistent natural world. We act as if we know what to expect, and formulate insufficient responses to increasingly likely scenarios, even as our growing knowledge and our own impacts on our natural environment make those expectations unreasonable.
We continue to build great cities near sea level, though we know ice is melting. We know water is rising, though we have no idea whether it will be smooth and steady, or punctuated by collapses of ice sheets.
We build increasingly complex ground and satellite based communication systems on top of a vulnerable electrical grid, all while knowing that a solar superstorm is inevitable. The unknowns are when that superstorm will hit, and whether we are preparing adequately for such events in order to minimize the damage and to recover any lost capabilities once the damage is done.
We go about our well developed mechanized agricultural routines of planting and harvesting, though we know that the technology consumes limited resources and contributes significantly to climate change. Soil is being depleted, fossil fuels are consumed, and we add mineral fertilizers of limited supply to drive high yields of commodity crops. Much of these crops are used to feed our unnecessarily excessive animal-based diet. Yet, we continue eating burgers like there’s no tomorrow.
We are also now aware that climate change threatens to severely impact agriculture production. Beyond simply shifting growing zones based on climate, chaotic weather will increase the probability of losses due to droughts, floods, hail and so forth. Plus insect pests and diseases may increase in severity. Fortunately, funding agencies are supplying grants toward research of these topics. However, there is no guarantee that we will overcome all of these challenges. In fact, it is almost a given that agriculture will have to adapt to one or more unsolvable outcomes of nature. We just don’t know which, or if our technology is up to the task.
We need nature
Nature provides the infrastructure for everything we do. Solid rock and water came from solar system processes. Sunlight provides heat. Our gaseous atmosphere retains and distributes that heat somewhat evenly. The combination of planetary placement, rotation and revolution about our sun, earth and moon system on a planet with adequate sunlight and atmospheric conditions yields a narrow range of conditions for liquid water and evolving life. In this system, photosynthetic organisms give us oxygen. We could not breathe or have aerobic respiration if not for the algae and plants of planet Earth.
And that is just the start. Each of us is immersed in a community of microbes. This raises the
question of what is a human, or any other large animal? Let’s talk about horses. What is a horse? A horse is a horse, of course. But that is so much more than horse DNA, gene expression and tissue differentiation. A horse relies on gut bacteria to digest its herbivorous diet. Every animal with a digestive system, not just horses, hosts a suite of microbes that assist us in digestion and help us maintain healthy bodies. We are also covered in bacteria. A healthy immune system likely requires regular interaction with a familiar microbiome. Overall, there are more microbial cells in and on us than there are animal cells.
Plants, like animals, also exist within a community of microorganisms. Healthy soil is teeming with complex communities of organisms, with the highest microbial abundances found on and near root surfaces. These communities are not simply sucking away plant resources. Many form mutually beneficial associations in which the plant provides carbon compounds from photosynthesis, while the microbial partners help the plant acquire limited mineral resources or add a layer of defense against pathogens.
On top of this, since we are consumers (heterotrophs), we rely on other larger life forms for food. Being highly adaptable omnivores has provided us the ability to consume many other algae, plants, animals and fungi. Nevertheless, for each organism we consume, we rely on the system that allows those organisms to exist.
With the possible exception of a few autotrophs, each organism is part of a complex web of life. How the strands are connected, and which links can be broken without destroying ourselves remain mostly unknown. It seems that a truly intelligent species would avoid breaking those strands as much as possible unless and until the effects of those losses is understood enough to reliably predict outcomes.
We have been fortunate to live in an epoch that is highly resilient to perturbations. Through all of our own impacts on the environment and unpredictable effects of natural processes, we have lived through thousands of years of increasing food production and agricultural productivity. Now, we can see the limits of ocean productivity, and we have cultivated much of the arable land. In other words, we are pushing the bounds of resiliency of the planet and nature to provide for humans. If we break this resiliency, the outcomes might be swift and severe.
We need technology
Modern agriculture utilizes technology. Mechanized equipment has replaced most of the people involved in farming. Even if we did away with the equipment and brought back farmers, we still use technologically advanced transport and communication systems to move the food from farms, through processors to consumers. Plus, agriculture now incorporates advanced molecular procedures and analytic techniques throughout the process of deciding what to grow, where, how to cultivate it, and best procedures for processing and distribution. Yes, economics has influenced each of these aspects of agriculture, sometimes negatively. Nevertheless, even if freed from economic considerations, modern agriculture, and the resulting civilization would still be developing towards more technologically advanced solutions.
This mechanization has affected all aspects of human existence, not just agriculture. Entire cities are now being transformed in the span of a generation thanks to advances in construction technology and processes. Transportation is evolving to ever more efficient and clean energy systems. Our homes are filled with all sorts of devices to open doors, prepare food and maintain a constant climate. Even medicine and surgery has progressed with decreasingly invasive equipment and methods, much of which is transitioning to robotics through artificial intelligence.
Perhaps the effects of technological advancement are most evident in communication. More and more people communicate directly in real time. Important decisions are made nearly instantaneously with input from almost anywhere on earth. Weather updates are transmitted by the minute through our radios, televisions and phones. Live video streams all aspects of human experience from the mundane to the historic. All of this has evolved tremendously over the last 100 years, and the pace continues to accelerate.
These advances have led to great advances in the volume of available information, management and analysis of this information, and our ability to make decisions based on current and accurate data.
Faulty assumptions lead to misguided actions
Given the pace of technological advancement, lack of understanding of our natural world, as well as, the human tendency to explain our lives in terms of religion and superstition, there are many misunderstandings surrounding technology and how we can incorporate it with life in our natural world. Among these are the following:
- We are too small to affect nature
Our actions are insignificant on the scale of the natural world. Nothing we do will threaten our own existence as much as natural processes. As we have already severely impacted ocean fisheries and terrestrial habitats, this argument requires ignorance to the point of being willful in order to be voiced with any sincerity. Humans have greatly impacted the earth, sometimes to our detriment. Our carbon emissions threaten all of humanity and civilization.
Some argue that we can survive only with technology and a selected set of nature that we control with technology. For example, we can live in biodomes with a few selected species. This is far from certain, and even if it is possible, we still have much to learn about ourselves and nature to make it happen. In other words, it’s not happening any time soon.
All of our advances in areas such as clean energy, communication and analytics will save us from destroying ourselves with the technology we developed in the past. Again, this is far from certain. It leans on the same arrogance that we had when we developed earlier technologies. Advancing technology will certainly be a part of any survival strategy for humans. However, it can only be useful when complementing natural systems. We have to work within nature and incorporate technology that is effective and safe. That is, we have to focus as much on working with nature as developing new technology.
Unfortunately, this is a serious argument of religious fundamentalist who maintain a historic grip on influence. It is an irresponsible argument that passes everything off to god. Why should god take care of those who cannot take care of themselves or the world god gave us?
- We are masters of nature and technology
This is another religious based argument that has undue influence. It is spiritual justification for doing whatever we wish with nature. It is similar to the we only need technology argument, but it assumes that we only need god to approve our master position. It does not help us understand or live within the limits of nature.
Only accurate understanding can save us
If we are to survive as a species and civilization, we need to understand both nature and technology. We will require natural systems for the foreseeable future. Technology can help us, but only in the context of our natural world. We must rely on nature to provide us with a livable world, do our best not to jeopardize the systems we rely on, and develop technology that complements these systems. We cannot simply master, manipulate and exploit nature. We are reaching the limits of natural resiliency to buffer against our acts of domination. If we continue on our present course, it will be too late. We must act to balance nature and technology. Fortunately, we still have the opportunity to do this. Do we have the adaptability and humility to accept that we do not control everything?