A Spaceship called Eschatology

This article appeared on “Virgin.com” on Aug 12, 2014.

Image from NASA

“Eschatology” is a Greek word meaning “the science of the end.” In ancient times, it used to be popular with theologians, but today it seems to have picked up interest to describe various kinds of catastrophes which could happen in the future. Things like giant asteroids falling on the Earth or, in the far future, the sun becoming so bright that it will cause the oceans to evaporate and wipe out all life.

Now, if eschatology means big, rapid and irreversible changes, you could argue that we’re going through a full-fledged eschatological event right now. It is a mineral eschatology caused by humans. Gigantic amounts of minerals have been extracted, processed, and dispersed in the atmosphere, in the oceans, and in the ground. It took hundreds of millions of years to create the ores we have destroyed in a few centuries. Hundreds of millions of years will be needed to recreate them – if indeed that will ever happen. The Earth is not any more what it used to be when humans first appeared on it, and it will never be the same again.

It looks like we’ve built a spaceship called eschatology that’s transporting us to an alien planet on a one-way trip. A planet hotter than the one we are used to living on because of the greenhouse gases generated by the mining and the burning of fossil carbon. A planet with many characteristics we might find very unpleasant: from the flooding caused by the melting of land glaciers, to the persistent pollution caused by the heavy metals and radioactive minerals we’ve dispersed everywhere. But perhaps the greatest difference is that in this new planet we won’t find any more of the rich mineral ores which have provided us with energy and resources we used to build our industrial civilization.

We may be able to adapt to a hotter planet, although that could mean enormous suffering for humankind. Within limits, we can also clean up the pollution we have generated. But how to live in a planet without cheap mineral resources?

It is true that minerals are never destroyed – so they will still be there and, in part, could be recovered from industrial waste. But, in the long run, in order to keep mining we would need to mine the undifferentiated crust, and that would be unthinkably expensive in term of the energy required. To say nothing of the disaster it would be in terms of pollution. The essence of the eschatological event we are living in is that the time of mining is almost over, at least in the form we have known it for centuries. That is, from miners with their picks and helmets in deep underground tunnels.

But if eschatology means the end of something, it may also mean the beginning of something else. If mining is heading to an end, we can still have minerals if we are willing to change the wasteful and inefficient ways we’ve been using to get them. We must close the exploitation cycle, and completely recycle what we use. It is possible, but it needs energy – much more than we needed to mine pristine ores. This energy cannot come from fossil carbon: that would simply accelerate depletion and worsen the climate problem. We need clean and inexhaustible energy: mainly sun and wind.

It is unlikely that this energy will ever be so cheap and abundant as the energy that was provided by fossil fuels at the beginning of their exploitation cycle; so, we’ll need to use it wisely. We’ll need to be much more efficient than we are today: we’ll need to create more durable industrial products, use energy carefully and substitute rare minerals with ones more common in the Earth’s crust.

Clean energy, recycling, and efficiency. This set of strategies is our ticket for survival in this interplanetary trip. In the end, spaceship Eschatology could give us a chance to abandon the ever-growing and never happy civilization of today and create a new civilization which could have enough wisdom to live and prosper on what is available and no more.

Cassandra’s legacy by Ugo Bardi

7 Comments on "A Spaceship called Eschatology"

Makati1 on Mon, 29th Sep 2014 9:09 pm

The site claims that I posted my comment, yet it doesn’t show on the page? What gives?

Makati1 on Mon, 29th Sep 2014 9:11 pm

This is my second try at posting…

Maybe Ugo needs to recycle his thoughts on solar and wind…lol. They are NOT net energy producers. No ‘renewable’ solar or wind energy component is possible on the EXCESS energy produced by either method. They only exist with hydrocarbon input somewhere in their life cycle.

Example: To recycle 1,000 aluminum cans takes about 14,53 MJ. That is about 3.8 KWh of electric or about 10 oz of petroleum.

A barrel of oil* will provide the energy to recycle about 3,000 pounds of aluminum cans into a pourable liquid that can then be used to form bars that then require the next step in the process, which also requires energy input in large amounts.

*A barrel of real petroleum contains the energy equivalent of about 1,500 MJ of electricity.

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=A0SO81bUCSpUvF0AXHxXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTByaDNhc2JxBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2dxMQR2dGlkAw–?qid=20100329161025AA7hx66
http://www.convert-me.com/en/convert/energy/megajoule.html

I’m not a physicist, but I can use the internet. Are my calculations wrong?

BTW: The world produced about 50,602,000 tons of aluminum in 2013 alone. And that is only one of many metals, all using huge amounts of oil energy to exist. No, renewables will not begin to sustain BAU in any form.

Norm on Mon, 29th Sep 2014 11:15 pm

The real computation is, how many dumb American slobs will it take to drink the corn syrup, and throw that many aluminum cans out the window of their monster truck? How
much does Alcoa have to pay each senator, to make sure there won’t be any can deposit law?

Marek on Mon, 26th Oct 2015 4:28 am

there are lessons to be lernaed from studying history. That statement has been uttered since the time immemorial. And yet, you see evidence of past mistakes being made over and over again. This means humanity is incapable of learning from the past if indeed it is history’s job to prevent future mishaps. Many historians wouldn’t suggest that.Facing the future is not easy for anyone especially if you do not believe that death in and of itself represents a triumph over the travails of life-living. Living this daily life with the certainty of triumph over death is not for everyone.Pastor John, you think big as much as you love to speak in the superlative. Thank you for the post. I wish more people would share their thoughts and make them public.

http://www.url2go.online/rqbk.gogif.cw.cm on Tue, 8th Dec 2015 11:14 pm

That’s really thinking of the highest order

Dora on Mon, 24th Sep 2018 2:12 am

I read your post and wished I’d wrtetin it

Lidia on Wed, 7th Nov 2018 8:06 pm

No comlapints on this end, simply a good piece.

A Spaceship called Eschatology

Leave a Reply Cancel reply