I: The Fivefold Attack on the Earth’s Life-Support System.

The Earth’s life support system is being destroyed by the exponential growth in the numbers of:-

* cars (cars and the car, and car-related, industries. It includes not merely cars but vans, lorries, buses, and coaches as well as all other forms of motorized transport such as motorboats and aeroplanes);

* kids (ooman overpopulation and the baby industries);

* cattle (the Animal exploitation industry);

* capital (the exploitation of the Earth’s capital [i.e. non-renewable] resources; the exploitation of the Planet’s renewable resources as if they were capital resources; the production of commodities, construction projects, and the growth of money); and,

* carnage (wars, refugees and the military industrial complex).

The Earth’s life support system is being devastated by five exponential growths which cannot possibly be sustained on a finite Planet. If these trends continue there will inevitably be a breakdown of the Planet’s life support system. The only issues at stake are firstly, how many decades it will take to happen, and secondly, whether this will lead to the extermination of the entire ooman race or just 99.9% of it?

The danger of exponential growth is that for a long while increases in numbers are slow and almost imperceptible. It is only during the middle stages that growth in numbers becomes larger, faster and more noticeable. The final stage is when growth rockets upward over a very short period of time. If drastic action is not taken before the onset of the third stage the momentum of change is so rapid and overwhelming it is almost impossible to reverse. What begins with a whimper ends in a bang.

The analogy used by the Ehrlichs to indicate the acceleration of exponential growth is the daily doubling of pond weed. After thirty days of growth, the weed covers the entire pond; "The question is, how much of the pond will be covered in 29 days? The answer, of course, is half. The weed will then double....to cover the entire pond. As this example indicates, exponential growth contains the potential for big surprises." It takes 29 days for the pond weed to cover one half of the pond but a mere day for it to cover the other half.

It is patently obvious that no ooman activity can enjoy infinite growth on a finite Planet. When, however, there are five simultaneous, exponential growths, each of which causes global, ecological destruction, then transparently an ecological collapse is likely to occur even before any one of them fulfills their full potential. At present there is probably room for a doubling of the world’s car population, or a doubling of the ooman population, or a doubling of the cattle population, or a doubling in the use of the Planet’s capital resources, or a doubling in the number of wars, without causing the collapse of the Planet's life sustaining processes. But, it is a geophysiological impossibility for all of them to double in size simultaneously without bringing about an ecological collapse.

In 1959 there were 50 million cars around the world - most of them in the united states. Today there are 400 million. Cars are being produced at the rate of 30 million a year. In less than two decades there could be a billion cars on the world’s roads. The pollution from these vehicles is massive, "The chemicals that pour from car exhausts are the most pervasive form of pollution in the world."; "The car is nothing short of an environmental disaster. It is also the fastest growing source of carbon dioxide."

In 1930, the global ooman population was approximately 2,000,000,000. Today it is approaching 6,000,000,000. It is currently growing at the rate of 1,000,000 every five days, but this rate too is increasing year after year. There are more people alive today than have ever died. There could be a billion extra oomans every decade. If these trends persist then by 2030, the global population could be 10,000,000,000. "The world’s population is growing faster than ever before, by nearly 95 million people a year. This unprecedented growth in human numbers will have profound effects on our physical environment. The current population of 5.6 billion will grow to 6.2 billion by the end of the century. Well over 90% of this growth will be in Asia, Africa, and latin America. And over half will be in south Asia and Africa, the poorest regions of the world."

For anyone over the age of 40 it appears as if the ooman population is growing exponentially, "Our generation is the first to witness the doubling of world population during a lifetime. Indeed, everyone born before 1950 has seen world population double." The fact is, however, that the human population is not growing at an exponential rate, "As for the world population, its growth rate has slowly declined from a bit over 2.0% per year in the early 1960s to 1.7% in the late 1980s." This is not much comfort because the annual increase in human numbers is still increasing, "The annual increment has climbed throughout this century from

13 million in 1900 to

37 million in 1950 to

91 million in 1992."; .. "the absolute increase of population rose from 73 million per year in 1970 to 96 million in 1990."

Even if the rate of population growth declines, the increase in ooman numbers continues to increase every year because the size of the population is so much bigger .. "a rate of increase of 1.7% per year operating on a base of 5 billion produces a yearly increase of 85 million." As a consequence .. "population ‘alarmists’ have not been saying that the growth rate itself would continue to grow rapidly, but rather that the present growth rate (over time) is unsupportable."

Some believe demographic trends indicate the global population will peak at roughly 10 billion in the middle of the next century. This estimate is usually mentioned by those opposed to birth control and abortion and who wish to head off anxieties about rapidly increasing numbers. There is no definite proof, however, that the human population will stop growing at this point and it could continue to rise past 20 billion, 30 billion, 100 billion before a collapse occurs. If natality is treated as a completely unfettered, unregulated market activity then, like all free market activities, boom will be followed by bust.

The ecological destruction caused by the future increase in human numbers will be enormous, "If the world’s population is to redouble in the coming century, and most of the additional 5,000 million come to live in cities, we will need at least a further hundred cities the size of today’s Mexico (20 million inhabitants) or a thousand cities the size of Naples (2 million)." Whilst the poor do not cause as much ecological destruction as the rich, they are still causing a vast amount of destruction - especially those trying to eke out a living by chopping down the Rainforests. "More recent estimates suggest that shifting cultivation activities destroy 50,000 km2 and degrade a further 10km2 of tropical rainforest a year."

The growth in the global livestock population has been exponential.

Fred Pearce: "The cattle population of the world rose from 700m in 1940 to 1,300,000,000 in the mid 1980s."

Erik Eckholm: "The world supports twice as many domesticated animals as humans - more than 10 billion. There are:-

3 billion creatures known collectively as ruminants mainly cattle, sheep, goats, buffalo, also camels and llamas. There are also

750 million pigs and, over

6 billion poultry."

There has been a "quadrupling in worldwide livestock production since 1950" (Guardian 17.10.91).

Alan B Durning & Holly B Brough: "Since mid-century .. the number of four-legged livestock - cattle, pigs, sheep, goats, horses, buffaloes and camels - has grown from 2.3 billion to 4 billion. At the same time, the fowl population multiplied from 3 billion to nearly 11 billion."

It is not known how many animals are being slaughtered around the world each year. It has been estimated that, "Every year in Britain, to satisfy our national hunger for meat, we slaughter some

450 million chickens,

25 million turkeys,

14 million sheep,

13 million pigs,

8 million ducks,

3 million rabbits, and,

1 million quail."

This is only a fraction of the total number of Animals killed in Britain. It has been estimated that in Britain roughly 750 million Animals are murdered each year and this estimate excludes the annual Fish kill since Fish catches are measured by weight not by numbers. In America, however, the situation is far worse, "The estimated 6 billion animals killed for human consumption every year."

The number of Animals slaughtered every year around the world is probably in the region of 100 billion - far in excess of the number of people slaughtered by the nazis during the second world war. Geophysiologically, "The increase in the numbers of cattle and cars in almost every country in the world threatens to do as much to advance the greenhouse effect as CO2 from power stations."

Ecologically speaking, capitalist societies could be defined as those which rely for survival primarily upon the Earth’s capital assets i.e. non-renewable resources such as fossil fuels, rather than the Planet’s income resources i.e. renewable resources such as Trees and Plants. The most dominant characteristic of all countries around the world, no matter what social system they have adopted, is the consumption of the Planet’s non renewable resources. From an ecological point of view, the Soviet Union was just as capitalist as the United States since both ruthlessly exploited the Planet's capital resources. Only tribal, indigenous, peoples live solely from renewable resources.

Whilst fossil fuels could be exploited quite legitimately without unduly disturbing the Planet’s geophysiology, the current rate of fossil fuel consumption is not merely obscenely profligate but poses a threat to the Planet’s life support system. Even worse is that these non-renewable resources are being used to destroy the Planet’s renewable resources.

"Americans have used more minerals and fossil fuels during the past half century than all the other peoples of the world throughout human history."

The growth in the consumption of just one fossil fuel, coal, is staggering, "We have used as much coal since world war two as had previously been used in the whole of human history."

"The phenomenal growth in world food output from 1950 to 1984 was due largely to the ninefold growth in fertiliser use."

"Between 1900 and 1960 more minerals were mined than in the rest of human history."; .. "more primary metal has been consumed by society during the past 25 years than during the whole of previous history."

"Roberty Ayres (1991) indicates that the world has actually gone through a long period of exponential growth of human-driven material flows."

The problem with capitalism (in the ecological sense) is not simply it is exploiting the Earth’s non-renewable resources but that it is treating the Earth’s renewable resources as if they were non-renewable. It is using the Earth’s non renewable resources to destroy the Earth’s renewable resources.

"45% of the world's rainforests have been destroyed in the last 30 years."; "Up to half the world's original woodlands have vanished since 1950." For the first time in history, it is possible to imagine the disappearance of all tropical Rainforests.

"Since mid-century the world has lost 1/5 of the topsoil from its cropland, 1/5 of its tropical forest, and tens of thousands of its plant and animal species."

The exploitation of livestock Animals has been noted above. Capitalism is also destroying increasing numbers of Wildlife and Wildlife species.

The global economy has been growing rapidly since the second world war, "The fivefold expansion of the world economy since 1950."; "In the last century, industrial production has grown fifty fold. Four-fifths of that growth has come since 1950."; "World industrial production is now 50 times greater than in the 1890s, and 80% of that growth has come since 1950."; "Global economic output expanded by more than a fifth during the decade."; .. "the world economy increases every two years by about the size ($60 billion) it had reached by 1900, after centuries of growth."

The 1980s was the longest period of global economic growth in ooman history. It was a period when the gulf between the rich and the poor became wider than ever; when more and more people found themselves in absolute poverty whilst more and more people enjoyed the most unparalleled gluttony in the whole of human history.

In the united states .. "annual production of organic chemicals soared from 1 million tons in 1930, to 7 million in 1950, 63 million in 1970 and 500,000,000 in 1990."

"At the current rate, world chemical production is now doubling in volume every 7-8 years. According to the UNEP, more than 7 million chemicals have now been discovered or created by humankind, and several thousand new ones are added each year."

"In 1992, the value of internationally traded goods reached $3.58 trillion (in 1990 dollars) almost 20% of gross world product. From a figure of $308 billion in 1950, world trade has increased almost every year, and the percentage of gross world product represented by trade has increased even more steeply."

Just after the second world war, the general agreement on trade and tariffs (gatt) was passed to introduce free trade in manufactured goods. The uruguay round, concluded in December 1993, extended free trade to cover the agricultural and service sectors of the economy. This agreement not merely ignores environmental issues, it overrides national environmental laws and will lead, over the following decades, to the total emasculation of all environmental rules and regulations, "If we allow the new GATT proposals to be adopted, then the entire world will effectively be transformed into a vast 'Free Trade Zone' within which human, social and environmental imperatives will be ruthlessly and systematically subordinated to the purely selfish, short term financial interests of a few transnational corporations."; "The GATT admits that the Uruguay round was never intended to consider the environmental effects of free trade. Since 1945 its environment committee has met only once. Countries or states who seek to ban the use of environmentally-unfriendly products will be deemed to act against the interests of free trade. Years of progressive consumer laws in Europe and the United States are threatened by the Uruguay Round claims Ralph Nader. If you want to see what is in store, head for Canada. The recently signed Canada-US Free Trade agreement is proof of Nader's worst fears. Canada has already been forced to lower its pesticide regulations, drop a ban on irradiated food and tone down planned reductions in smelter emissions."

"GATT overrules EC tariffs on Central American bananas."

Gatt has set up the multilateral trade organization (mto) to regulate the implementation of the gatt agreement. The mto is, in effect, the first world government because it has the power to impose sanctions on countries which refuse to abide either by the agreement or by its decisions. Its objective is total global free trade, "GATT has proposed a new Multilateral Trade Organization, a new world power. The governing body of the MTO would be a ministerial conference meeting every two years after December 1993. Decisions would be by a clear two-thirds majority. There are no stipulations to protect the environment. It even bypasses the United Nations."

The gatt agreement has already led a number of governments to start deregulating their environmental regulations in case they are taken to the mto for contravening free trade rules.

"The prime minister yesterday announced that 7,000 government regulations affecting business will be reviewed. Some of the environmental regulations that could go were introduced as recently as 1990. The decision by Michael Howard, the Environment secretary, to remove regulations created in the 1990 Environmental Protection Act, is a surprise."

President clinton recently decided to renew china’s status as ‘most favoured trading nation’ despite its poor human rights’ record. But he didn’t break the link between trade and human rights as an exception for china. He abandoned the link altogether. The reason for doing this was because it had been outlawed by the gatt agreement.

The world’s biggest Earth rapists today are multi-national corporations, "The top 500 companies of the world now control about 70% of world trade, 80% of foreign investment and 30% of world GDP (about $300 billion a year)," says Richard Tapper of the WWF. "Apart from controlling trade the top 500 companies now generate more than half the greenhouse emissions produced by global industry" says Kevin Watkins of Oxfam."

The recent gatt agreement has in effect given multi-nationals the right to destroy as much of the Earth as they want, "If approved (the GATT proposals), they will have delivered the world to its pillagers on a plate, to do with as they like."

There has been a vast increase in the number of capital construction projects around the world not merely in the over-industrialized nations. These construction projects have suffocated a vast acreage of land.

It is not known how many capital construction projects have been built over the last few decades nor is it known, as was pointed out above, how much land has been suffocated by construction projects. A rough estimate can be inferred only from the scale of cement production, "The rate of use of cement has been increasing rapidly over recent decades. For example, in 1970 the global use of cement has been estimated to have been 568,910 x 103 tonnes and in 1980 it was 920,000x103 tonnes."

"Three quarters of the world’s superdams have been built in the last 35 year; around 50 of them were completed in the 1980s."; "In the past 40 years, the amount of water trapped behind large dams has increased 25 fold and .. artificial reservoirs now hold the equivalent of roughly 13% of the total run off of rivers to the oceans."

"1,600 Third world mega-projects launched during the seventies at a total price tag of $1 trillion dollars."

There is probably more money in circulation today than in the whole of ooman history. The global economy is worth is the region of $20 trillion. Currency speculators have amassed such colossal fortunes they are able to challenge and undermine national exchange rate policies, "Exchange rates are now governed by footloose international money rather than economic reality."

Huge quantities of money are being used to employ hundreds of millions of jobholders throughout the over-industrialized world to work full time on asset stripping the Earth’s resources. Over the next few decades this workforce will double in size doubling the amount of ecological damage.

The growth in the size of the world economy and in the quantity of money circulating in the world economy is paralleled by the growth of poverty. There are more people living in a state of abject poverty than ever before.

Global military expenditure increased almost exponentially until the 1990s; military weaponry has become increasingly devastating; the number of people in military service, whether professional or conscript, has been growing.

There have been 130 wars during the supposedly peaceful period since the second world war.

The numbers of refugees fleeing wars has been increasing almost every year from the 1970s.

Humans’ impact on the Earth is now so pervasive they are not merely matching many of the Planet’s geophysiological processes they are overwhelming them.

Over the millenia oomans have taken control of more and more of the Earth’s land surface. The Earth has a total land area of 130 million square kilometres (13,000,000,000 hectares). Oomans have now taken over a substantial proportion of this land,

"11% of the world’s land is used to grow crops;

2% is paved over or covered by cities or towns;

25% serves as pasture;

30% still forested;

33% ice sheets, deserts, mountains."

"For most of the trace species - CH4, CO, NOx - the human output is now comparable to or exceeds the natural production, and there is no longer a natural cycle."

"In 1990, mines scouring the crust of the earth to supply the consumer class moved more soil and rock than did all the world's rivers combined."

"Today, worldwide, there are more than a hundred 'superdams', with a height of more than 150 metres, subduing some of the world’s greatest rivers. Three quarters of the world’s superdams have been built in the last 35 year; around 50 of them were completed in the 1980s. Their reservoirs have a total capacity of 6,000 cubic kilometres and they cover almost 600,000 square kilometres. That makes them, in aggregate, roughly the size of the North Sea. Their capacity is equal to 15% of the annual run-off of the world's rivers."; "By about the year 2,000 about 2/3rds of the world’s total flow of water to the ocean margins will be controlled by dams."; "In the past 40 years, the amount of water trapped behind large dams has increased 25 fold and now amounts to around 5000 cubic kilometres. This is a substantial interruption to the planet’s hydrological cycle; artificial reservoirs now hold the equivalent of roughly 13% of the total run off of rivers to the oceans."

"Already those dams are holding back so much water that they articially lower by a few millimetres the tides on every beach in the world."; "In the past 30 years, the reduction in river discharges worldwide is equivalent to a drop in sea level of 0.7 metres a year." This is not to argue that sea levels have fallen.

"Human activity accounts for roughly 10 times more sulphur being injected into the atmosphere than natural suphur emissions from sources such as volcanoes."; "In just 10 years the Sudbury copper and nickel smelter in Ontario, Canada emitted more sulpur dioxide than all the volcanoes (the main natural source) in the history of the earth (sic)."

"Since the industrial era began, people have rivalled nature as the depositors of the greatest amount of toxic wastes and particulates into the atmosphere."

The extent to which oomans are overwhelming the Earth can also be measured in terms of humans’ expropriation of the Earth’s Photosynthetic capacity, for which see below.

Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, the over-industrialized world has been dumping so much pollution into the atmosphere and deforesting such vast areas of the Earth, they have started to boost global warming, "Global mean surface air temperature has increased 0.3C to 0.6C over the last 100 years, with the five global average warmest years being in the 1980s." More recent evidence shows that, "The eight hottest years (globally averaged) in the past century were, in increasing order: 1980, 1989, 1981, 1983, 1987, 1988, 1991, 1990."

It is suspected that the only reason global average temperatures have not increased more dramatically in line with the wholesale geophysiological damage caused by over-industrialized oomans is because the Earth may have been heading back into another ice age. Human induced global warming could be overwhelming the return of the next ice age .. "global mean surface temperature has increased by 0.3 to 0.6C over the last 100 years. Thus the observed increase could be largely due to this variability; alternatively this variability and other human factors could have offset a still larger human-induced greenhouse warming." One commentator goes even further and suspects that the Earth’s climate began slipping back into an ice age during the medieval period but was dragged out of it by the destruction which humans inflict on the Earth during that time, "As Gribbin has pointed out, there is the real possibility that the enhanced greenhouse effect is preventing the onset of the next ice age. It is also pertinent to examine the possibility that it may have already done so. There is widespread evidence for cooling during what is generally recognized as the ‘Little Ice Age’ of the fourteenth to the early 19C. While it is unequivocal is that interglacial environments were characterized by climatic variation .. there is no precedent for cold periods similar to the ‘Little Ice Age’ in earlier interglacial periods." The impact of the over-industrialized world on the Planet’s global temperature is becoming so overwhelming it is threatening not merely to delay the next ice age but to create the conditions for runaway global warming which could devastate the Planet’s geophysiology.

Three of the five human activities outlined above are growing at an exponential rate (cars, cattle and capital) whilst the other two are close to doing so. If the ecological damage caused by these activities could be added up every year it would be found they are causing an exponential growth in ecological damage. Perhaps the strongest evidence that human activities are causing an exponential rate of ecological damage is the accumulation of atmospheric Carbon.

The release of Carbon emissions is taking place at an exponential rate, "In the 1920s around a billion tons (metric/of carbon) a year were released; by the 1960s this had increased to 2.5 billion tons; today it is over 5 billion."; "There has been a worldwide rise in carbon dioxide emissions of 10% since 1983." The accumulation of atmospheric Carbon is growing at an exponential rate, "More than half of the increase in the gas - from 310 ppm to 350 ppm has occurred since 1958."

Although humans are causing ecological damage at an exponential rate this is not in itself a danger. As has been pointed out above, there are three stage to exponential growth. What is so threatening about the current state of exponential ecological damage is that it is either soon to enter, or has already entered, the final stage of exponential growth. Even worse, humans may be on the threshold of the final doubling of ecological devastation because it is likely that the Planet’s life support system will collapse before each of the five factors has doubled. Whilst it may be possible that one or other of these five exponential growths could undergo two or three doublings during this final stage of exponential ecological damage, it is simply not feasible that all five could enjoy a doubling without causing a geophysiological breakdown. Humans are not merely in the last stage of exponential growth, they are in the final doubling period.

One piece of evidence that humans are in the period of final doubling is that, "Currently 0.28 hectares of cropland is available for every man, woman and child. By 2030, assuming cropland area expands by 5% between now and then and that population grows to 8 billion, cropland per person will have dropped to 0.19 hectares - a third less than we have in today’s inadequately fed world." Cropland per hectare cannot go on decreasing at this rate without causing an utter calamity.

It has been estimated that humans have already taken over 40% of the Planet’s terrestrial Photosynthesis, "Biologist Peter Vitousek at Stanford University estimated that 40% of the earth's annual net primary production on land goes directly to meet human needs or is indirectly used or destroyed by human activity - the share could double by 2030 if current rates of population growth and consumption continue."; "Nearly 40% of the earth's land-based photosynthetic activity is devoted to the satisfaction of human needs or has been lost as a result of human degradation of natural systems." It is believed that this expropriation of the Earth’s Phytosynthetic capacity will double with a doubling of the ooman population. The human race "is now using or co-opting at least 25% of the planet's net primary productivity. I see no sign that we, as the dominant organisms on the planet, are in any way acting to make it more hospitable for life."

In one sense, this is not as serious as it seems since if humans merely take over and thus maintain the same level of Photosynthesis, then this may not breach any ecological limitation and the climatic consequences may not be much different. In another sense, however, it is much more serious than it seems, "Although 40% may technically be less than half, we had better think of it as indicating relative fullness, because it is only one doubling time away from 80% a figure which represents excessive fullness." Daly does not estimate how long it will take to achieve the next doubling nor what the ecological consequences may be. The next doubling of the human population or the next doubling of economic growth (either of which could take place over the next fifty years) could lead to a doubling in the expropriation of the Earth’s Photosynthetic capacity. However, if the growth in the number of cars, kids, cattle, capital and carnage continues at their present rates then the expropriation of the Earth’s terrestrial Photosynthetic capacity could take place within the next three decades.

It has also been estimated, however, that since the second world war there has been a massive reduction of 13% in terrestrial Photosynthesis. This is much more serious than the mere expropriation of the Earth’s Photosynthetic capacity. In addition, the significance of the 13% reduction is much greater than it seems because, as Lovelock points out, it is not necessary for an entire ecosystem to be destroyed before it collapses of its own accord, "The effects of forest clearance will probably be the first gigantic disaster to greet us within the next decade or two. Numerical models based on Gaia theory, and the experience of past civilizations, both predict that once more than this proportion of a self regulating ecosystem dies (65%) then it can no longer sustain its climate and total collapse takes place." Clearly 13% is a lot closer to 65% than it is to 100%. If humans have destroyed 13% in the last 50 years they could destroy another 13% in the next 50 years, another 26% over the following 100 years, thereby bringing total destruction within sight of Lovelock’s 65% limit. This hypothetical rate of Photosynthetic destruction, however, is linear. If it was to accelerate because of the exponential growth in the numbers of cars, kids, cattle, capital and carnage, then humans could reach Lovelock’s limit not within 150 years but 50 years or even less.

Humans are far closer to a global ecological calamity than is suggested by the expropriation of 40% of terrestrial Photosynthesis and the 13% reduction in terrestrial Photosynthesis. Given that over the next thirty years there could be a doubling of the human population and perhaps a gatt inspired tenfold increase in industrial production, then clearly THE HUMAN RACE IS PUSHING THE EARTH TOWARD AN ECOLOGICAL CATASTROPHE.

ii) Ecological Limitations: the Proximity to a Breakdown in the Earth’s Life Sustaining Processes.

Another way of looking at the threat posed by ecological devastation is by looking at the Earth’s ecological and geophysiological limitations and trying to determine how close humans are to surpassing these limits.

Humans, just like any other Animal on Earth, are confronted by a range of environmental limitations to their existence.

Firstly, local ecological constraints.

Secondly, local-global ecological constraints. Local constraints may become so common across the world they add up to global ecological constraints.

Thirdly, limitations to atmospheric pollution.

Fourthly, geophysiological constraints since humans and other species can survive only within a certain climatic and temperature range; and,

Finally, Biodiversity limitations.

The following sections are not meant to provide a comprehensive analysis of these ecological and geophysiological limitations but to highlight the existence, and thresholds, of these limitations.

Humans are faced with a number of local, ecological constraints.

If humans cut down a Forest they may change the local weather which could then have adverse consequences for growing crops.

If humans clear a Forest there could be water shortages/Soil erosion/landslides which could affect their survival in that area.

If humans exploit Forests too rapidly they will run out of fuelwood. This local energy limitation has become so commonplace in many tropical Rainforest areas it is begining to breach geophysiological limitations - for which see climatic limitations. The scale of damage has already been pointed out, "More recent estimates suggest that shifting cultivation activities destroy 50,000 km2 and degrade a further 10km2 of tropical rainforest a year."

Vast numbers of the world’s poorest people are running out of fuelwood, "It is now estimated that about 100 million people in the world are unable to obtain enough fuel for even their minimum cooking and heating requirements and that well over one billion are depleting their locally available stocks of wood faster than the replanting rate. By the year 2000 about 3 billion people are likely to fall into this category."; "The UN estimates that 1.5 billion of the 2 billion people around the world who rely on fuelwood for cooking and heating are cutting wood faster than it is able to grow back naturally."; "And as forests are destroyed every day, science estimates that by the end of the decade, 2.4 billion people, the vast majority living in developing countries, will either be unable to secure their minimum energy needs or will be forced to consume wood faster than it is being grown."

If humans (or their livestock counterparts) dump too much Manure onto the land or in streams, lakes and rivers, they will poison these habitats. The amount of Manure that can be absorbed by the land is a local ecological limitation. Holland, has become what the european commission defines as a ‘manure surplus’ country because it produces so much manure there is too much for the land to absorb. Unfortunately humans have been able to evade this ecological constraint by the simple expedient of dumping manure into the oceans, burning it in incinerators or, as many greens suggest, turning it into ‘renewable energy’.

If humans dump too many toxic chemicals onto a piece of land or into a waterway it will kill Plants and Animals and, in the worst cases, sterilize the habitat.

If humans mismanage irrigation they may cause salinization or water-logging making the land useless for growing crops.

If humans overwork or exhaust the Soil they will cause desertification. Growing too many crops removes too many minerals and nutrients causing the Soil to disintegrate. It is not possible to remove more minerals and nutrients than are put back into it without destroying the Soil. This local ecological limitation can occur simultaneously across vast stretches of the Planet. In antiquity, the romans conquered the carthaginians, took over their land to grow wheat, and supplied rome with cheap bread. The nutrients in the entire north of africa were removed from the Soil, transported across the sea and then flushed down hundreds of thousands of roman loos. It was not long before the soil became exhausted and the whole area turned into desert - a desert which still exists.

This same process of nutrient extraction is currently taking place throughout the over-industrialized world where the Soil is being kept fertile solely by the use of artificial fertilizers whilst hundreds of millions of tons of human Manure are flushed into rivers and seas poisioning aquatic life. Similarly, vast areas of land in poor/industrializing countries have been turned over to growing cash crops and, as a consequence, vast quantities of nutrients are being sucked out of the Soil only to end up being dumped into the sewage systems in the over-industrialized nations. The life-blood of the world’s Soils is being vampirized by over-industrialized, factory pharm oomans whose Manure is then flushed away as quickly as possible to poison the environment.

Soil erosion is another local ecological limitation which is rapidly becoming a global ecological limitation for which see below.

If humans dump pollution into the atmosphere in most cases it will usually be swept away. In some cases, however, the pollution lingers in the locality for days or even weeks causing respiratory problems for all oomans and Animals.

Humans have learnt to evade most of the Earth’s local ecological constraints. They can do this either by finding another piece of land/waterway or by dumping pollutants over a wider area. Throughout its all too short history (a history which seems to be getting shorter every day) the human species has succeeded in evading most local/regional ecological limitations - even if some humans, and some human groupings, have not.

Although in the past it was possible for humans to evade the consequences of breeching local ecological constraints simply by moving elsewhere this is becoming increasingly more difficult. Most of the land has already been occupied and there are fewer and fewer places to go. Local ecological constraints have suddenly become global ecological constraints. Humans cannot avoid global ecological constraints.

Local deforestation is rapidly being turned into global deforestation. Billions of people will eventually run out of fuel wood. There will also be climatic consequences of global deforestation - see below.

"The human enterprize has passed the point where the energy required to support it in its present form can be obtained entirely through green plants."

The contamination of local Soils/waterways is rapidly becoming a global issue or at least a continental issue, "In Europe an estimated 20 million hectares of soils have been seriously damaged by industrial activity, mostly by air pollution such as acid rain and the fallout of heavy metals."

The scale of Soil erosion has been highlighted earlier, "More than a tenth of the world's soils have lost a substantial amount of their natural fertility in the past 45 years, according to the first results of a 15 year Global Assessment of Soil Degradation, funded by the United Nations Environment Programme."; "Annual (global) soil loss amounts to 75 billion tonnes." If it was known how much Top-soil there was around the world it would be possible to work out how much longer it would survive.

In most places around the world, and at most times throughout history, there have been few local limitations to the dumping of pollutants into the atmosphere. There comes a time, however, when so many local people solve their local ecological problems by dumping pollutants into the atmosphere they surpass global ecological limitations and cause a global problem.

If humans dump too much dust or aerosols into the atmosphere either through over-industrialization, bad pharming practices causing wind erosion, or nuclear war, etc., this blocks out sunlight. In the most extreme cases it could cause a nuclear winter which, if it persisted for many years, could lead to continental, or even global, crop failures.

Although a nuclear winter could cause crop damage around the world and even lead to a collapse of so-called human civilization, it is unlikely to change the long term climate. The aerosols would probably be washed or blown out of the atmosphere within a few years and the climate would then return to its previous state.

Humans are also confronted by climatic limitations. If humans breech these limitations the climate could change dramatically making the Earth less hospitable for humans.

Whilst it is possible to dump pollution into the atmosphere and escape any immediate adverse climatic consequences, if humans dump large quantities of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere it could increase global temperatures and cause climatic disasters.

The more that humans destroy the Earth’s Photosynthetic capacity, the greater the disruption of the Planet’s Carbon spiral, the bigger the climatic changes. Ultimately, if humans eradicate the Earth’s Photosynthetic capacity the Earth could become inhospitable. There is no scientific knowledge, however, about the critical point at which the damage to the Earth’s Photosynthetic capacity would cause a climatic disaster. Firstly, it is not known how much of the Earth’s terrain can be suffocated under tarmac and cement before there is climatic disruption. Secondly, assuming the area of land carrying out Photosynthesis is not reduced, it is not known how much it is possible to reduce the efficiency of terrestrial Photosynthesis before there is climatic disruption. However, there is little doubt that the current scale of ecological destruction is moving rapidly towards a critical point.

There seems little doubt that the ecological and geophysiological destruction caused by the exponential growth in the five human activities outlined above has boosted global warming. However, it is not yet possible to say that the increase in global temperature over the last century has definitely been caused by anthropogenic global warming. The increase remains within climatic variation. There has been only a slight increase in global temperatures over the last century. As has been pointed out, the reason that global temperatures have not increased more substantially is probably because global warming has been offset by global cooling as astronomic factors push the Earth’s towards the next ice age. But, this too cannot be proved.

Similarly whilst there has been an increase in the number of climatic disasters over the last few years there is no proof that these disasters have been caused by anthropogenic global warming. Once again, the increase in disasters could be within climatic variation. The best evidence about the increasing numbers of climatic disasters around the world has been produced by greenpeace which recently published a diary of the disasters which have taken place since 1989.

Greenpeace argue, "For the 20 year period up to October 1987, there had been no catastrophes causing losses of more than a billion dollars (in constant 1992 dollars)." By July 1990 there had been seven climate disasters; by September 1992 there had been 10; and by July 1993 perhaps 13.

The climate disasters causing a billion dollar insurance bills are (in chronological order):-

No.1; October 1987.

"An unnamed storm (in Europe) in October 1987 had caused $2.5 billion of insured losses." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.6).

No.2; September 1989.

"Hurricane Hugo of 1989, which caused $5.8 billion of insured losses, was the most expensive disaster in US history." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.6).

No.3; January 1990.

In Europe in January 1990 .. "the insurance bill for Windstorm Daria had been $4.6 billion." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.6).

Nos.4/5/6; February 1990.

In Europe .. "in February 1990, three .. storms piled up $5.8 billion in losses." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.6).

No.7; July 1990.

"Seventh ‘billion-dollar’ natural catastrophe in three years. .. a windstorm in Colorado .. causes more than a billion dollars of insured losses." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.11).

No.8; September 1991.

"Typhoon Mireille, the eighth billion-dollar storm since 1987, hits Japan. On 27 September, Mireille becomes the sixth strongest in the Japan Meteorological Agency’s records. It damages 1.6% of all Japanese households, draining $2.21 billion from the Japanese insurance industry’s property-catastrophe reserve system ..." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.45).

No.9; October 1991.

"Californian wildfire: ninth billion-dollar catastrophe in four years. In the fifth year of the Californian drought, a major bushfire sweeps through the Oakland Hills. The insurance price tag exceeds $1.7 billion, and the economic losses are around twice that. It is the third biggest fire in US history ..." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.46).

(No.10?) August 1992.

"(Hurricane) Andrew reaches storm intensity on August 17th and crashes into the Bahamas on August 23rd. The hurricane continues west and runs into Florida on the morning of August 24th. Insured losses hit a new world record of $16.5 billion, and a storm track 20 miles north would have made it at least $50 billion worse." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.78); "Hurricane Andrew in 1992 alone caused $16.5 billion in insured losses." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.19); "Between 1970 and 1992, the insurance industry had taken $10.8 billion in premiums in Florida. In the few hours it took Hurricane Andrew to pass across the state in August 1992, the industry lost all that and almost $6 billion besides." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.100). It is not clear why greenpeace do not regard Hurricane Andrew as the tenth billion dollar insurance disaster.

No.10; September 1992.

"With insured losses of $1.6 billion, Cyclone Iniki becomes the tenth "billion dollar windstorm" for the insurance industry within five years. It was the strongest hurricane to affect Hawaii since the Weather Service opened in world war II." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.81).

(No.12?) March 1993.

"US storm of the century causes havoc from Canada to Cuba. Total insured losses reach $1.6 billion and total costs were over $6 billion. The "snowicane" kills 270 people ..." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.105).

(No.13?) July 1993.

The Mississippi flood; "The damage bill passes the $10 billion mark." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.118).

The world’s insurance industry has suffered huge losses because of insurance claims resulting from property damage caused by climatic disasters. Over the last few years some of the world’s biggest insurance companies have faced mounting losses caused by claims for asbestos-related health problems, natural disasters, industrial accidents, etc., but the losses caused by climatic disasters have also been substantial.

"Between 1970 and 1992, insurance companies took more than $10 billion in premiums for property insurance in Florida. On 24th August 1992, within the few hours Hurricane Andrew took to pass over the state, they lost all of that, and another $6.5 billion besides. In the past six years the insurance industry has been hit by a succession of huge claims following devastating tropical hurricanes.

In 1988 Hurricane Gilbert devastated Jamaica;

in 1989 Hurricane Hugo caused havoc in the West Indies;

in 1992 Hurricane Andrew, followed a month later by

Cyclone Iniki, the most powerful storm to hit Hawaii this century.

Since 1987 insurance companies have had to pay more than $50 billion in meeting claims following a string of severe storms and other disasters."

"Between 1970 and 1985, total insured losses from natural and man-made catastrophes had varied between $2 billion and $6 billion (at 1991 prices). Then they began to go up.

In 1989 they reached $14 billion,

in 1990 $18, and

in 1991 $15 billion."

A number of insurance companies have already gone out of business because they are no longer able to provide cover in certain regions of the world.

Climatic disasters have had the most devastating impact on the lloyd’s insurance market. Despite the fact that global warming has hardly started to affect the Earth, it has already nearly brought down one of the world's biggest institutions. Lloyd's losses have been as follows,

1988 $1 billion;

1989 $3.3 billion;

1990 $4.3 billion (five of the biggest insurers lost $1 billion);

1991 $1.5 billion."

"One insurers' nightmare scenario is a supercyclone smashing into Manhattan or Tokyo. This could generate claims approaching, or even exceeding, the total funds available for reinsurers, which currently stand at about £160 billion. Senior executives in insurance companies believe that a complete collapse of the reinsurance industry is possible. If that happens, the direct insurance market also implodes .. And one of the world's biggest businesses - at £1.3 trillion a year turnover is more than the arms trade or the oil industry - would have shrunk to a shadow of its former self."

The following list of climatic disasters is sketchy in comparison to greenpeace’s recently published work and readers are recommended to consult this work if they want a more detailed picture.

"The drought in Zimbabwe is the worst in a century."

"In 1988 .. one of the most powerful hurricanes of the 20thC, Hurricane Gilbert, scythed through the caribbean. Sweeping in a 2,500 mile arc from St Lucia in the eastern Caribbean to the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico, it killed hundreds, left hundreds of thousands homeless and caused billions of dolars worth of damage. Just one month later, Hurricane Joan grazed the northern coast of South America and cut a swathe through Central America. The strongest hurricane ever to hit Nicaragua, Joan unleashed 170 mph winds on the Atlantic coast, destroying towns, roads, bridges, crops, wildlife and forest."

In October 1989 Hurricane Hugo caused extensive damage which cost the insurance industry $5.8 billion.

"In 1991, a fire levelled almost 3,000 homes in the Oakland Hills, near Berkeley, in northern California."

"The Florida emergency services .. estimated property damage at between $15-20 billion making this the most expensive storm in US history. The US air force base at Homestead was effectively destroyed."; Hurricane Andrew caused an estimated $30 billion in damage in August 1992."; "South Florida resembles a suburb of Mogadishu ..."

Hurricane Iniki hit Hawai causing estimated damage of $1 billion."

"The US' most powerful winter storm this century enveloped the eastern part of the country."

The earliest estimates of the costs of the flood damage were quite modest, "Causing damage estimated at $2 billion." Gradually, however, as the floods persisted and the scale of the damage became apparent the costs began to increase rapidly.

"In the past three weeks, more than 80,000 people have been forced from their homes and 22 have died. A 500 mile stretch of the Mississippi has been closed to traffic, at incalculable cost to commerce." (Guardian 13.7.93. p.9).

"The flooding has been blamed for at least 25 deaths and an estimated £5 billion in damage in eight states." (Guardian 17.7.93. p.11).

"The Mississippi floods have caused 30 deaths and $10 billion damage." (Guardian 20.7.93. p.9).

"Nearly two months of flooding in nine mid-western states has caused 45 deaths and at least $10 billion in damage to crops and property." (Guardian 3.8.93. p.8).

(The flood caused the destruction of water supply/sewerage systems, damaged water reservoirs, broke communication lines, damaged roads).

"For six years now an area (in north east Brazil) larger than France has been suffering from a severe drought."

Some reports have sugested that the Arctic is melting but it is not yet possible to say with certainty whether this is due to anthropgenic global warming or not.

"Asia’s worst fires have engulfed more than 250,000 acres of tropical rain forest in Indonesia. There are also signs of a break in the 5 month drought which helped to spread the inferno rapidly to the islands of Sumatra and Borneo. 74% of the 360 million acres of Indonesia’s sprawling archipeligo are covered by rain forests. The fires appear to have begun in intensively logged places which are strewn with highly inflamable debris."

"Floods have made more than 10 million people homeless in China this year."

"A 33ft wall of water which roared down the Shutul river valley into Gulbahar, 60 miles north east of Kabul. At least 400 people died in the village .. the flood caused by heavy rains along the headwaters of the Shutul."

"At least 200 people have died in flash floods which swept both the Indian and Pakistani territories of Kashmir state." The worst floods in Pakistan this century.

"Monsoon rains of unusual ferocity have killed more than 800 people, forced millions out of their homes and caused damage totalling hundreds of millions of pounds in northern India, Nepal and Bangladesh."

The hurricane that hit south east England in October 1987 caused 17 fatalities and nearly £1.2 billion in damages. At the time it was alleged that the storm was a freak of nature unlikely to occur again for 150 years.

In October 1989 there were winds of 115mph and torrential rain that claimed 13 lives.

This year two massive storms killed 60 people and caused £2.4 billion pounds. "The Association of British Insurers puts the total cost of the 1987 hurricane at £1.2 billion. Estimates for this year's storms are £2.5 billion." 1990's storms have caused damage amounting to £2.4 billion. Insurance rates going up.

"This unusually long, hot, dry summer could see record levels of subsidence claims - well in excess of the £400 million which was paid out last year to Britain's 20 million homeowners. In the south east alone, more than 30,000 homes have already been affected this year by subsidence." A Meteorological Office spokesman on the drought said " a few more questions need to be answered before global warming can be blamed."

"The French environment minister went on television last week to announce emergency measures to combat the country's four year drought. She set up six agencies, covering the hydrological basins of the country, to help communities threatened with a lack of drinking water, to control the extraction of ground water and to protect the ecology of rivers. The agencies can spend $3.5 billion over the next 5 years."; "More than 70% of France's electricity is generated by nuclear power; EDF finished last year with a deficit of 4 billion francs - one reason was the lengthy drought."

"Flash floods and storms swept through south-eastern France this week. Rescue officials feared as many as 80 people had died."

"In Greece there have been power cuts because, as a result of unseasonably hot weather, electricity supplies short-circuited repeatedly because of dust encrusted cables. In Athens’s congested city centre faulty traffic lights brought chaos. The drought .. is the worst since records were first kept in 1907."

"The Royal Society of Canada concludes that over the last two decades, natural hazards such as windstorms, floods and fires, have increased significantly. In the past twenty years an estimated 3 million people have been killed, over 800 million lives affected and C$300 billion lost as a result of natural disasters worldwide ..."

Reported losses of life due to extreme weather events in 1992 included:

Pakistan 5,112 - flood

India 1,382 - flood, cold and storms;

China 1,110 - storm and flood;

Madagascar hundreds - drought starvation and disease;

Turkey 284 - avalanches;

USA 114 - hurricane and tornadoes;

Indonesia 86 - flood and landsides;

Japan 83 - wind and flood;

France 80 - storm and flash floods;

Argentina 54 - flood.

Between 1987-1992 there were 41,831 fatalities in 68 countries as a result of weather events."

"Natural catastrophes in 1993 cost $50 billion in economic losses worldwide, compared to the record $62.5 billion in 1992. Floods accounted for 63% of these losses worldwide, and windstorms 31%. Insured losses were $10 billion in 1993 compared to the record of $24.4 million in 1992. Floods accounted for 27% of the insured losses, and windstorms 60%. The seven biggest disasters requiring national or international or supra-regional aid together cost $23 billion, of which only $6 billon was insured - a much smaller proportion than recent years because heavy flooding was prominent in the list of catastrophes .."

The Earth is a dynamic entity created by living entities. There are ecological limitations imposed by the fact that the Earth was created, and is still maintained, by Micro-organisms, Plants and Animals.

Killing one wild Animal will not cause an ecological disaster; killing a local species of Animal (usually defined, by humans, as a ‘Pest’) may cause a local ecological disaster; killing vast numbers of wild Animals may cause a national ecological disaster; but killing large numbers of Wildlife species would breech Biodiversity constraints which could lead to the destruction of the human race. If humans killed all Wildlife, this would entail the destruction of the Earth’s topsoil and this would mean that humans would only be able to grow food artificially. There would also be significant changes in the Earth’s life support services which would make the Planet increasingly inhospitable for humans. It is possible that humans could exterminate Animal species at the top of the food chain without transgressing ecological constraints if they took over the ecological functions of these species but, as humans begin to exterminate species further down the food chain, it would become increasingly difficult to take over their ecological functions and ecological problems would then begin to proliferate. Humans may not be able to exterminate Wildlife species very far down the food chain - in Turtle island (north america) the near extermination of the Buffalo and their replacement by cattle has been a regional ecological disaster whose repercussions will continue to be felt for hundreds of years. The same applies to spread of cattle in africa.

VI: Which is the Most Ecologically Threatened Country in the World?

A: Bangladesh.

"Only one nation in the world runs greater risks from catastrophic floods than China - Bangladesh."

B: Canada.

"In just two centuries Canadians have ravaged some of the richest ecosystems in the world. The outlook for the world's second largest country is grim."

C: Pakistan.

"Pakistan has been transformed by irrigation .. 80% of its fields are irrigated. Here, as nowhere else, the success or failure of the green revolution and the ability of the third world to fight salt will be decided." "Modern agriculture (in Pakistan) is in the process of creating a vast salt pan across the Sind."

Russia’s ecological problems have been caused by government policies rather than the climate, "The catalogue of environmental and ecological devastation within the USSR has grown:

the poisoned lake Baikal in Siberia;

the shriveled Aral Sea in Soviet central Asia;

saturation of land and groundwater with pesticides in the cottonfields of Kazakhstan;

the uncontrolled chemical industry emissions of Yerevan, Armenia;

the air polluting metal smelting and refining plants of northern Russia; Chernobyl in the Ukraine."

"Salt is the scourge of most irrigation schemes. According to the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization as much as half of all irrigation systems around the world are seriously affected by salinity or related problems of waterlogging. Some 10,000 square kilometres of land are abandoned every year because of salt encroachment. One scientist argues that salt threatens the national economies of Argentina, Egypt, India, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and Syria."

In the past many commentators have suspected that the countries most threatened by climate change would be poor/industrializing countries not merely because their climates are more variable but because they do not have the resources to implement preventative measures or carry out repairs. One of the most surprising insights suggested by greenpeace’s ‘the climate time bomb’ is the huge impact which climate related disasters are having on north america. Quite clearly given its huge capital investments, america was always going to be vulnerable to a climatic disaster but it also seems to have been hit by more disasters than any other country.

US Weather Disasters since 1980 involving billion dollar plus economic losses.

1. Severe floods - summer 1993. Central US. $12 billion, 48 deaths.

2. Storm/Blizzard - March 1993. Eastern US. $6 billion, 270 deqths.

3. Hurricane Iniki - September 1992. Hawaii. $1.8 billion. 5 deaths.

4. Hurrican Andrew - August 1992. Florida and Louisiana. $25 billion, 58 deaths.

5. Hurricane Bob - August 1991. Coastal North carolina, Long Island And new england. $1.5 billion, 18 deaths.

6. Hurricane Hugo - September 1989. North and south Carolina. $7.1 billion, 57 deaths.

7. Drought/Heatwave - Summer 1988. Central and eastern US. $40 billion, estimated 5,000 to 10,000 deaths.

8. Hurricane Juan - October-November 1985. Louisiana and Southeast US. $1.5 billion, 63 deaths.

9. Hurricane Elena - August-September 1985. Florida and louisiana. $1.3 billion, 4 deaths.

10. Hurricane Alicia - August 1983. Texas. £2 billion, 21 deaths.

11. Drought/Heatwave - June-September 1980. Central and eastern US. $20 billion, estimated 1,300 deaths."

Even more surprising than the climate induced disasters affllicting north america are the ecological disasters afflicting california. California has the 12th largest economy in the world. It is the archetypal land of milk and honey where some of world’s richest people live (or rather have homes) and where there are millions of wealthy people. It is one of the world’s high tech centres. It is the headquarters of some of the world’s largest mulit-national corporations. Its populace is one of the most highly educated in the world.

It might have been thought that california’s huge wealth, technological sophistication, high educational standards, etc., would have ensured it could have been made relatively safe from climate disasters. This has turned out not to be the case. If anything, it seems to have suffered the worst damage of any ‘country’ in the world. If california cannot protect itself what hope is there for poorer countries?

In addition, california is also the leader in high tech agriculture using the most advanced chemicals, pesticides, and now, genetic engineering to boost crop yields and to control local ecological conditions. It is, therefore, the agro-chemical battleground between humans and nature. Although so far humans have won almost complete victory over local ecological conditions in california, the Earth has not been defeated and is fighting back with devastating results. Global warming seems to be assisting the Earth in its fight against ooman terrorism.

December 1990: "The coldest Christmas on record freezes birds and damages crops in California. The citrus crop is particulalrly badly hit." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.21).

1992: "California endured water shortages for the sixth consecutive year ..." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.96).

February 1993: "Californian drought declared over during deluge." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.104).

"Ten inches of rain falls, causing the deaths of 8 people (in Los Angeles). All the reservoirs are inland, mostly fed by snowmelt from the Sierra mountain range. Flash floods are caused by sudden torrential rain like this, and the only possible option is to channel it all away as soon as possible to avoid flood damage. So the ten inches of rain mostly runs off to the sea, and will have done virtually nothing to alleviate the drought, now in its sixth year." (Greenpeace International ‘The Climate Time Bomb’ The Netherlands, 1994 p.61); "Californian drought declared over during deluge. The worst flooding in 60 years leaves the region with mudslides, floods, dam overflows and a ruined multi-million-dollar lettuce crop." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.104).

October 1991: "In the fifth year of the Californian drought, a major bushfire sweeps through the Oakland Hills. The insurance price tag exceeds $1.7 billion, and the economic losses are around twice that. It is the third biggest fire in US history ..." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.46).

September 1992: "Drought in California causes 70,000 wild fires over a "long hot summer"." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.80); .. "a massive forest fire - started by two discarded cigarette ends. They were tossed away by two hunters who face a £2 million bill for the cost of fighting the blaze. At least 20,000 acres of forest have been destroyed and 80% is still out of control .. in the Santa Ynez valley north of Los Angeles."

October 1993: "Five-county disaster declared in California (October 1993) after brushfires. President Clinton declares a major disaster as 15 wildfires burn out of control across 88,000 acres from the Mexican border to the northern suburbs of Los Angeles. At least 30,000 people are forced to flee their homes, including the entire 24,000 population of Laguna beach, the worst hit area, where a seven mile wall of fire marches towards the sea. At least 600 homes go up in flames, including Malibu millionaires’ mansions ..." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.130); "In just 24 hours, 100 ft flames reduced much of Malibu, the playground of the rich and famous, to ashes. The mansions of Hollywood tough guys Charles Branson and George C Scott were severely damaged. Sean Penn’s home was a blackened shell. Comedy star Dick Van Dyke was oredered out of his home moments before it was engulfed by the inferno. More than 300 million-pound homes were destroyed as a five mile long firestorm consumed everything in its path. Actress Ali McGraw saw her multi-million dollar mansion reduced to ashes. Billionaire TV producer Aaron Spelling - the man behind Dynasty and Beverly Hills 90210 - and actor Lloyd Bridges both lost weekend homes."

November 1993: "Two weeks of fire in California cost one billion dollars. Fires on 3 November add to the damage done on 27 October. All told, 26 firestorms rage over two weeks. Police suspect arson in 19 of the fires. With some 1,241 structures destroyed in total, and 197,225 acres burned from the Mexican border to Los Angeles, the Office of Emergency Services .. estimate the total damage at around a billion dollars. The insurance industry’s Property claims Service gives a preliminary estimate of $950 million." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.132-3).

"The first of the season’s rainstorms, little more than showers, arrive two weeks after the fires. The earth literally flows off the barren (deforested) hillsides, causing still further disasters for residents .. The mudslides block roads, damage houses and turn rivers muddy and black. "Fire is the major trigger device of mud flows in Southern California," says a Los Angeles County flood control expert. "You can get major mudslides with only one or two inches of rain."" (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.134); "Another unusually severe winter storm in the disaster-hit state blocks highways. Tons of mud crash into millon-dollar mansions, and power is knocked out for thousands of homes. Worst affected again is Malibu, where electricity is cut to 3,000 homes ..." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.155); "Torrential rain triggered flash floods causing mudslides 3ft deep. Ferocious tornados swept the district - still in shock from the autumn wildfires and last month’s killer earthquake. Up to 10,000 people who were made homeless by the January 17 tremor had to brave the weather in flimsy "tent towns" which still fill the city’s parks."

"A new strain of whitefly, with no known natural enemies and resistant to insecticides, is decimating fruit and vegetable crops in California. Losses are expected to total about $85 million and thousands of workers will be laid off because of the plague ..." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.46); "A small brown beetle is a new weapon in California's war against the silverleaf whitefly, a pest (sic) whose voracious appetite has ravaged the state's agriculture for the past three years. In 1991 alone, the silverleaf caused three-quarters of a billion dollars of crop damage in the US."

"Californian vineyards are being devastated by an aphid, Phylloxera, which almost wiped out Europe’s vines in 1873. The current outbreak is believed to be a mutant variety of the insect, and replanting of vines will probably cost about $1 billion." (‘The Climate Time Bomb’ p.77).