Climate Change and the Future of Food: Soylent Green is People!

The problem of feeding billions of people in a world with an increasingly warmer climate is comparable to a fictional dystopian future

"Soylent Green is people!" shouted Charlton Heston's character at the end of the sci-fi thriller: Soylent Green (1973). The plot is set in the year 2020, a future where environmental disaster and overpopulation has strained the food supply trying to feed 100 billion people living on earth. It is a time where large corporations provide rations to the poor with processed wafer chips called Soylent Green- a food wrongfully marketed as being made from high-energy plankton. Coinciding with environmental disaster, climate change would cripple the production of food in a plethora of ways ranging from extreme floods and droughts, to migration of animals and people, and extreme high and low temperatures, just to name a few. Food production of meat and crops will be adversely affected, but it makes for a dystopian possibility not too distant from the movie's story.

Recently, Lord Stern publicly denounced the consumption of meat regarding the practice as detrimental to the environment and predicts a society without meat. Meat production inefficiently uses land, water, and energy resources. These resources could feed much more people if instead used to produce foodstuff from plant crops only. However, the problem of worldwide hunger is a result of poverty much more so than environmental mismanagement. Yet, the future of climate change would make the situation more distressing.

The hardest nations to be hit with the effects of climate change will be the people in the Tropics (The latitudes 23 degrees north and south of the equator) which unfortunately is where a majority of the poor developing nations reside. The U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization calls for an annual $83 billion dollars of spending for poor nations to meet the needs of a 9.1 Billion population projected by the year 2050. For China and India alone, spending will need to be $29 billion annually. Although a majority (75%) of this funding will be put forth by private farmers, their efforts to increase production are hindered by poor infrastructure (roads, facilities) and will need public support and funding. The possible food shortage makes solutions like genetically modified (GM) food more economically necessary. GM food is an idea not too far fetched from the fictional plot of Soylent Green.

Growing population plus food shortages plus climate change spell a global problem. Increased funding plus GM food are possible global solutions. As of now, the UN fund for climate change mitigation is abysmally in the low million-dollar range. An estimated $610 billion dollars are needed for the world to adapt to climate change and renewable energy, a number which equates to the 1% of global GDP popularized as a climate change target set by the ominous Stern Review. Genetically modified, however, food is vastly unpopular, but minds may change when they are starved for food. Would world leaders ever think to turn to the solution of Soylent Green? Hopefully not, but just the thought is enough to consider a shift away from meat production all together.

Ultra Concrete Solutions for Green Building and Climate Change

Development doesn't happen without concrete, the most used building material. The production of concrete emits 5-10% of the world's emissions.

Concrete has been synonymous with the development of civilization for millennia, since early masons first poured it on Roman streets. The material has literally shaped the world and literally, has stood the test of time. Its production, however, has proven costly to the environment.

The production of concrete emits 5-10% of the world's emissions. It is manufactured at a rate of 2.35 Billion tons a year enough for 1 cubic meter for everyone on the planet (Sciencedaily, 2007). If the process could reduce 10% of its carbon footprint, the end result would be one-fifth of the Kyoto Protocol's total global reduction target (5.2%). The immense heat, 1500°C, needed in cement production is the root cause of the extraordinary emissions. By using a different element other than limestone (which is mixed in with clay), scientists hope to eliminate the need for the high temperatures, and high-energy expenditures.

Nanotechnology has revealed that the particles of concrete structure together like apples on a fruit display. It is this configuration that gives the material its strength, and like a fruit display they can be packed tightly (most efficient, most strong) or scattered about (least efficient, less strong). Finding a better element that packs neatly, but requires less heat is the ultimate concrete goal. In doing so, development and growth of nations can continue using locally abundant minerals without unnecessary high carbon emissions.

Currently, there is no bigger way to cut emissions than increasing building efficiency. The heat losses a building suffers in the winter and the cost of air conditioning in the summer can account for the majority of the energy expenditures for any given country. Advanced concrete will be better able to insulate buildings, absorbing heat in the day and releasing it at night. Already 10 times stronger than the generation thirty years ago, concrete is now comparable to steel and aluminum, both of which create more carbon emissions per unit than concrete. Other advances include the ability to destroy pollutants that come into contact with a concrete structure and a type of concrete that can be applied to aging buildings that squeezes out moisture, thus enhancing structural longevity. Yes, concrete- the stuff durable green buildings are made of!

As promising as concrete is, like any technological solution accounting -in the form of life-cycle assessments- must prove impact on the environment is as minimal as possible. Development alters the face of the planet, forever, but it doesn't have to alter the climate forever as well. Ideally, a construction site will transport its materials using biofuel and power its equipment from renewable energy. It will compensate for the displaced foliage by planting replacement trees. Only with proper planning and foresight can the potential of a concrete jungle coexist with a green one.

Social Entrepreneurship Targets Climate Change & Poverty

Social entrepreneurs kill two birds with one stone: poverty and climate change

Increasingly intense storms threaten to damage homes and scorching hot droughts will wear thin the water supply of many nations. Take your pick, social entrepreneurship can be an effective method to mitigate the effects of climate change. Social entrepreneurship can help lower carbon emissions, increase energy efficiency, and provide safe means of carrying out daily chores while being very cost effective.

Social entrepreneurship is defined as the addressing of a social problem through an entrepreneurial venture. In other words: A sustainable business venture that seeks to impact society in a positive way. It is distinguishable from a charity in the sense that a social entrepreneurship venture strives to make gains and profits in order to provide more good to the people either in the form of services or products. There seems to be no bigger and more widespread threat to society nowadays than climate change.

Poor countries are going to be the hardest hit by climate change and that is because they don't have the money to protect themselves from global warming and its many side effects. By addressing the problem now, social entrepreneurs are filling needs of these people while also improving their local environment. A most popular example of all social entrepreneur ventures is d.light design, which addresses the dangers and environmental impact of kerosene lamps by replacing them with much safer, carbon neutral solar lamps. Another great venture is development of cheap solar stoves that harness the power of the sun to replace the need to burn wood or coal for cooking, thus eliminating tons of carbon emissions a year. As water resources become scarcer, need for access to fresh water will deepen and cheap filtration will be a big part of the solution. Electricity, heat, and water, delivered, in an environmentally sustainable way.

By offering a cheap product to the potential billions of people in developing countries social entrepreneurship can certainly be profitable. This revenue could provide the kind of money needed by countries to begin renewable energy projects to lower emissions or the development of infrastructure to safeguard from severe storms and flooding. Jobs would be created and the war on poverty would be one step closer to being won.

However, like all business ventures it will take the relentless dedication of social entrepreneurs to pour their hearts out creating meaningful solutions and products worth buying. Any such endeavors will take time to grow and it is uncertain if that growth can be fast enough to provide changes in the environment on a scale that is required. Even if social entrepreneurship isn't the end all solution to climate change it certainly provides the indispensable result of increasing awareness for climate change in every corner of the globe.