Technogaianism

Technogaianism (a portmanteau word-combining “technological” for technology and “Gaian” for Gaia philosophy ) is a bright green environmentalist stance of active media for the research, development and use of emerging and future technologies to help restore Earth ‘s environment . Technogaians argue that developing safe, clean , alternative technology should be an important goal of environmentalists . [1]

Philosophy

This point of view is different from the general position of radical environmentalists and a common opinion that all technology is necessarily degrades the environment, and that environmental restoration can only be reduced to a reduced reliance on technology . Technogaians argue that technology gets cleaner and more efficient with time. They would also point to such things as hydrogen fuel cells . More directly, they argue that such things as nanotechnology and biotechnology can directly reverse environmental degradation . Molecular nanotechnology, For example, Could convert garbage in Landfills Into Useful materials and products , while biotechnology Could lead to novel microbes devour That hazardous waste . [1]

While many environmentalists who? ] still contend that most technology is detrimental to the environment, technogaians point out that it has been in humanity’s best interests to exploit the environment mercilessly until fairly recently. This method is intended to be used in the context of evolutionary systems , in which new factors (such as foreign species or mutant subspecies ) are introduced into an ecosystem , they tend to maximize their own resource consumption until, a) they reach an equilibrium beyond which they can not continue unmitigated growth, goldb) they become extinct. In these models, it is completely impossible for such a factor to be completely destroyed, although they may precipitate major ecological transformation before their ultimate eradication. Citation needed ] Technogaians believe humanoid HAS Currently atteint just Such a threshold, and que le only way for human civilization to continue Advancing is to accept the tenets of technogaianism and limit future exploitive exhaustion of natural resources and minimize further Top unsustainable development or face the Widespread , ongoing mass extinction of species . [2]The destructive effects of modern civilization can be mitigated by these solutions, such as using nuclear power. Furthermore, technogaians argue that only science and technology can help humanity be aware of, and possibly develop counter-measures for, risks to civilization, humans and planet earth such as possible impact event . [1]

Sociologist James Hughes mentions Walter Truett Anderson, author of To Govern Evolution: Further Adventures of the Political Animal , as an example of a technogaian political philosopher; [3] Argues That technogaianism applied to environmental management is found in the reconciliation ecology writings Such As Michael Rosenzweig ‘s Win-Win Ecology: How The Earth’s Species Can Survive In The Midst of Human Enterprise ; [2] and considers Bruce Sterling’s Viridian design movement to be an exemplary initiative technogaian. [1] [4]

The writer of English writer Fraser Clark may be broadly categorized as technogaian. according to whom? ] Clark advocated “balancing the right hippie brain with the techno left brain”. The idea of ​​combining technology and ecology were extrapolated to a South African eco-anarchist project in the 1990s. The Kagenna Magazine project aims to combine technology, art and ecology in an emerging movement that could restore the balance between human and nature.

George Dvorsky suggests the feeling of technogenesis to the Earth, uses sustainable technology , and creates ecologically diverse environments. [5] Dvorsky argues that defensive counter measures could be designed to counteract the effects of asteroid impacts, earthquakes , and volcanic eruptions . [5] Dvorksky also suggests that genetic engineering could be used to reduce the environmental impact of humans on the earth. [5]

Methods

Environmental monitoring

Technology facilities sampling, testing and monitoring of various environments and ecosystems. NASA uses space-based observations to conduct research on solar energy, sea level rise, the temperature of the atmosphere and the oceans, the state of the ozone layer, air pollution, and changes in sea ice and land ice. [6]

Geoengineering

See also: Climate engineering

Climate engineering is a technique that uses two categories of technologies- carbon dioxide removal and solar radiation management . Carbon dioxide removal addresses a cause of climate change by removing one of the greenhouse gases from the atmosphere . Solar radiation management Attempts to offset effects of greenhouse gases by Causing the Earth to absorb less solar radiation .

Earthquake engineering is a technogyne method concerned with protecting society and the natural and man-made environment of earthquakes by limiting the seismic risk to acceptable levels. [7]Another example of a technogical practice is an artificial closed ecological system, which is used to test if and how to operate in a closed biosphere , while carrying out scientific scientific experiments . It is in some cases used to explore the possibility of using biosphere in the colonization , and also allows the study and manipulation of a biosphere without harming Earth’s. [8] The most advanced technology is the ” terraforming ” of aplanet , moon , or other body-modifying damaged deliberately by ict atmosphere , temperature , or ecology to be similar to Those of Earth in order to make it habitable by humans. [9]

Genetic engineering

See also: Genetic engineering and Genetically modified food controversies

S. Matthew Liao, professor of philosophy and bioethics at New York University , claims that the human impact on the environment could be reduced by genetically engineering humans to, a smaller stature, an intolerance to eating meat, and an increased ability to see the dark, thereby using less lighting. [10] Liao argues that human engineering is less risky than geoengineering . [11]

Genetically modified foods have reduced the amount of herbicide and insecticide needed for cultivation. The development of glyphosate-resistant ( Roundup Ready ) plants has changed from herbicides to higher herbicides, as well as atrazine , metribuzin and alachlor , and reduced the volume and danger of herbicide runoff. [12]

An environmental benefit of Bt-cotton and maize is reduced use of chemical insecticides. [13] [14] A PG Economics study concluded that global pesticide use was reduced by 286,000 tons in 2006, decreasing the environmental impact of herbicides and pesticides by 15%. [15] A survey of small Indian farms between 2002 and 2008, which resulted in higher yields and lower pesticide use. [16] Another study concluded that the insecticide was used during the 1996 to 2005 period by 35,600,000 kilograms (78,500,000 lb) of active ingredient, which is roughly equal to the annual amount applied in the EU. [17]A Bt cotton study in six northern Chinese provinces from 1990 to 2010 Concluded That It halved the use of pesticides and Doubled the level of ladybirds , lacewings and spiders and environmental benefits extended to Neighboring crops of maize, peanuts and soybeans. [18] [19]

Related environmental schools and movements

  • Biopunk / Do-it-yourself biology
  • Bright green environmentalism
  • Biomimicry
  • Communalism (political philosophy)
  • Eco-communalism
  • Prometheanism
  • Reconciliation ecology
  • Social ecology
  • The Zeitgeist Movement
  • Viridian design movement

See also

  • Appropriate technology
    • Open-source appropriate technology
  • Green nanotechnology
  • Environmental ethics
  • List of environmental issues
  • List of topics
  • Ten Technologies to Save the Planet (book)

References

  1. ^ Jump up to:d Hughes, James (2004). Citizen Cyborg : Why Democratic Societies Must Respond to the Redesigned Human of the Future . Westview Press. ISBN  0-8133-4198-1 .
  2. ^ Jump up to:b Rosenzweig, Michael (2005). Win-Win Ecology: How The Earth’s Species Can Survive In The Midst of Human Enterprise . Clarendon Press. ISBN  0-19-515604-8 .
  3. Jump up^ Anderson, Walter Truett (1987). To Govern Evolution: Further Adventures of the Political Animal . Harcourt. ISBN  0-15-190483-9 .
  4. Jump up^ Sterling, Bruce (2001). “Viridian: The Manifesto of January 3, 2000” . Retrieved 2007-01-28 .
  5. ^ Jump up to:c George Dvorsky, 7 Best Case Scenarios for the Future of Humanity, Sentient Developments, (Feb. 2, 2013).
  6. Jump up^ Global Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: NASA’s Role, Taking a global perspective on Earth’s climate
  7. Jump up^ Bozorgnia, Yousef; Bertero, Vitelmo V. (2004). Earthquake Engineering: From Engineering Seismology to Performance-Based Engineering . CRC Press . ISBN  978-0-8493-1439-1 .
  8. Jump up^ Gitelson, II; Lisovsky, GM & MacElroy, RD (2003). Manmade Closed Ecological Systems . Taylor & Francis. ISBN  0-415-29998-5 .
  9. Jump up^ Zubrin, Robert, The Case for Mars: The Plan to Settle the Red Planet and Why We Must , p. 248-249, Simon & Schuster / Touchstone, 1996,ISBN 0-684-83550-9
  10. Jump up^ Ross Anderson, How the Human Body Engineering Could Fight Climate Change, The Atlantic, (March 12, 2012).
  11. Jump up^ Mathew Liao S, Human Engineering and Climate Change, (Feb. 12, 2012).
  12. Jump up^ Shipitalo MJ, Malone RW, Owens LB (2008). “Impact of Glyphosate-Tolerant Soybean and Glufosinate-Tolerant Corn Production on Losses in Surface Runoff Herbicide”. Journal of Environment Quality . 37 (2): 401-8. doi : 10.2134 / jeq2006.0540 . PMID  18268303 .
  13. Jump up^ Roh JY, Choi JY, MS Li, ​​Jin BR, I YH (April 2007). “Bacillus thuringiensis as a specific, safe, and effective tool for insect pest control”. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol . 17 (4): 547-59. PMID  18051264 .
  14. Jump up^ Mariner M, McCreedy C, Regetz J, Kareiva P (June 2007). “A meta-analysis of effects of cotton and maize on nontarget invertebrates”. Science . 316 (5830): 1475-7. doi : 10.1126 / science.1139208 . PMID  17556584 .
  15. Jump up^ Brookes, Graham & Barfoot, Peter (2008)Global Impact of Biotech Crops: Socio-Economic and Environmental Effects, 1996-2006AgBioForum, Volume 11, Number 1, Article 3. Retrieved 12 August 2010
  16. Jump up^ Krishna, Vijesh V .; Qaim, Morning (2012). “Bt cotton and sustainability of pesticide reductions in India”. Agricultural Systems . 107 : 47-55. doi :10.1016 / j.agsy.2011.11.005 .
  17. Jump up^ Kovach J, Petzoldt C, Degni J, Tette J. “A Method to Measure the Environmental Impact of Pesticides” . New York State Agricultural Experiment Station . Retrieved 23 November 2008 .
  18. Jump up^ Carrington, Damien (13 June 2012)GM crops good for environment, study findsThe Guardian. Retrieved 16 June 2012
  19. Jump up^ Lu, Yanhui; Wu, Kongming; Jiang, Yuying; Guo, Yuyuan; Desneux, Nicolas (2012). “Widespread adoption of Bt cotton and insecticide decrease promotes biocontrol services”. Nature . 487 (7407): 362-5. doi : 10.1038 / nature11153 . PMID  22722864 .
  20. Jump up^ Jan Suszkiw (November 1999). “Tifton, Georgia: A Peanut Pest Showdown” . Agricultural Research magazine . Archived from the original on 12 October 2008 . Retrieved 2008-11-23 .

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.