Background

When the citizens of the State of Colorado (USA) voted in 2011 to legalize marijuana few could have imagined the impact of this decision on the environment and the economy. Five years later the pharmaceutical industry had lost $165 million in annual sales of painkillers just in that one state, while sales of medicinal cannabinoids (known as CBD or Cannabidiol, and THC or Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol) to suppress pain surpassed in the same year and the same territory of 5.4 million inhabitants the one billion dollar mark. The 600 cannabis shops in Denver, Colorado surpass the number of branded coffee shops. It has been estimated that thanks to the investment boom in 2016 ten thousand people moved to Denver each month to tap into the bonanza of pot, as the drug is colloquially called.

​The economic impact of the legalization of cannabis is beyond imagination of those who put the opportunity to a vote: real estate prices boom, minimum wages boom, the local government budget booms, the number of arrests for possession is down, the prison population is decreasing, and the boom and bust of the shale gas industry is alleviated by this boom in the fast emerging pot economy. On top of these benefits, the legalization diverts cash that would have left the local economy either to enrich out of state pharmaceutical companies or foreign mafias, into the local economy with predictable multipliers. It is a boom that surpasses the promises of shale gas which was concentrated in the hands of a few, by catalyzing a revolution in the economy driven by thousands of small entrepreneurs and investors. The multiplier effect of this cash injection into the region is phenomenal. 

While there are many reasons to celebrate the economic and social benefits of turning an illegal trade into a legitimate one, few have focused their attention on the environmental impact of farming cannabis for recreation or medicine.

ease without relying on an overkill with chemicals. If in addition the indoor farming is combined with appropriate light, including ultraviolet rays that mimic the exposure under the sun and cleanses the plants of competing microorganisms, then the production system will evolve from strength to strength.
 
Perennials and Canopies

How could the obsession with the flower, that contains the highest concentration of the cannabinoids, neglect the biology of an ancient perennial. Cannabis moved from the subtropical regions where rain means winter and sun is associated with summer, to the the foothill of the Himalayas where the four seasons impose annual cycles. Now that cannabis is farmed indoors in Colorado, the ideal species would be the short-lived perennial ones. Perennials would reduce the cost of handling and cut the massive waste associated with single season farming.  ​In the end the growers wish to have more flowers, and this relies on a plant that grows an expanded canopy in early life. 

all attention goes to the flower, ignoring the fact that the broader the canopy, the higher the number of flowers. ​The basics are known, but the practice was already blinded by the desire to achieve one single objective: to grow as many flowers as quickly as possible at any financial and environmental cost. Since a sachet of marijuana could be priced at the store as much as $70 per unit (down from $110 a few years ago), while the cost is a mere $5 (x14), the strategy is solely focused on the short term production - whatever the volume at whatever the cost. As a result, the industry is neglecting the option to go back to basics (As hippies did in 60's) and search for the perennial varieties that grow outdoor

This includes a smart use of shifts in pH, enhancing the facilities' design for an alkaline environment, the flows of chlorine free water, moisture that could carry moulds, air rich in carbonic gases when the lights are on, particles that enrich growth, light and darkness as means to ensure a natural flowering. This offers a window to embrace the wonders of nature, to drop costs, increase quality and safety of end flows improve. If on the other hand the industry sticks to what the farming experts know, this engine of the economy will go down in history books as another false promise. It will leave ghost towns behind like the Gold Rush did in the 19th century.
 
Positive Whistleblowing

The Blue Economy is dedicated to positive whistleblowing: what opportunities is this wildly popular and profitable industry missing? A handful of site visits between Aurora, Durango, Fort Lupton, Fort Collins, Denver and Boulder convinced me that industry oscillates between these obsessive regulations around issues that hardly matter, and a total absence of regulations around the health and safety of workers, customers and the environment that should matter. Since I do not expect the policy makers to take any lead, due to the void created by the absence of Federal permits, laws and regulations, it is up to the industry to take the initiative and start converting its act from the reality of today to the potential of tomorrow. The approach we suggest, without wanting to be prescriptive, would combine the capacity to considerably increase output, while cutting costs, reversing the environmental damage, by putting this highly popular farming onto a track that promotes health, safety and sustainability. 
​The first step of course is to ensure that the biodiversity of cannabis plants is adapted to the ecosystems. While this sounds obvious, it is a first important step: avoiding standardization by ensuring that each growing condition is optimal for a few strains of cannabis plants. The second step is to ensure that the indoor facilities (assuming that this will remain a requisite for the permit) operate under a mould free environment, while the plants have the ideal symbiosis with mycorrhizal fungi. The focus on biodiversity and symbiosis strengthens the immune system of the plants and this is the best (perhaps even only) way to protect the plant from mites. If the use of chlorine (highly acidic) is replaced by a bacterial and fungal control based on a benign blend of hydrogen peroxide and vinegar produced on site when needed, then we have eliminated over 90% of the health risks associated with the present farming. Perhaps ignorance of the challenges the sector faces today, and ignorance of the solutions that are immediately available blind the goodwill that nearly all have once exposed to these observations. 

Waste Management

The third intervention required relates to waste management. The extraction of the active ingredients, with an exclusive focus on the flowers, produces - as discussed - massive volumes of waste. It is estimated that the State of Colorado generates perhaps 5 million pounds per day. This is massive. This biomass goes to landfill. The toxic cocktail of chemicals is blended with a massive volume of organic matter and a growth medium ranging from cheap soil with a poor  poor carbon content, to perlite  that is mines  and wasted

call to consider the potential social and environmental good by shifting to a business model that ensures profitability and sustainability like seldom seen before (in any industry). The lack of Federal regulations should be exploited for the good, and this degree of freedom must be celebrated for as long as it lasts.  ​

Glass and Gas

The perlite challenge is worth dwelling on for a moment more. Perlite is mined. It is used as a growth medium and discarded after only one use. Since the separation of the mineral from the plant roots is difficult, all gets dumped according to the regulations, and the industry pays the full cost without complaining. If all greenhouses were to opt for glass foam as a growth medium which is not less than recycled beer and wine bottles, even recycled car windshields, then the industry would create an opportunity to get out of the "glass trap". Indeed, the demand for recycled glass has dropped to the point that many cities have stopped recycling altogether.

​The cannabis trade spurs a strong growth in demand for a sterile growth medium, promoting the presence of beneficial microorganisms. This could put new life into glass recycling as over a dozen facilities throughout Europe have demonstrated, while generating jobs with a locally available waste. This converts a cost into a revenue, and facilitates the conversion of a mined material with one that can be recycled forever, while eliminating a nuisance for the city waste manager. This is clearly a win-win-win for all and it is profitable as soon as 5.5 million bottles can be guaranteed in a region. 

If 40-50 operators of greenhouses collaborate, then there will be a business case that could be funded out of available cash flow, and … by the way, this reduces GHG emissions.
The same logic can be extended to the biomass that is now shredded on site and hauled to landfills. This does not make sense. The fact that cannabis is behaving like a hardwood ensures its long and powerful conversion into minerals through exposure to methanogenic bacteria. Cannabis is most likely one of the most effective biogas generators since the cannabis plant never converts stems to bark implying a high potential for the production of biogas. Just like breweries realized that their massive volume of spent grains could lead to large quantities of natural gas, mushrooms and bread, the same logic could be applied to the cannabis industry provided it cuts back on its toxic cocktails. The recent super-effective digesters that operate with 12 chambers produce so much gas that it cannot be neglected anymore as a source of revenues and wealth creation. If we add that the cannabis industry is the single largest new user of power in the State, then it makes sense to take on this opportunity. And, from the point of view of the "Feds", there is nothing more secure than the "transformation" of all cannabis waste into a mineralized form generating energy. ​

The rapid growth from an underground business to one that occupies 600 commercial buildings and just under 2,000 production sites in less than 5 years stresses the available stock of industrial and commercial real estate. While the price per square foot has increased tenfold, and more investments pour into the economy, the quality of the buildings leave lots to be desired for the industry, which has focused on the speedy occupation of available space. Now the time has come to design dedicated structures that take the specific needs of the industry into account. It seems that few have made any serious reflections on how such an indoor cannabis farming and processing unit should look like to boost output, but probably most important to meet the standards for a product that has medicinal value.

There is sufficient science available to convince the pharmaceutical industry the unique medical value of cannabis extracts. When scientists discovered that the brain and the cells in the immune system have dedicated cannabinoid receptors, it seems that our health of body and mind has been designed for this natural agent[1]. The capacity to control pain without the risk of addiction is an appealing proposal. The personal anecdotes always help to put this cannabis revolution in a homely context. A close friend in his 70's had been suffering for decades from debilitating backache and had developed allergies or addition to traditional painkillers. Frank V. finally found relief thanks to cannabis after the very first topical application, and could start dancing again much to the delight of his wife who recalls the fun times they had in the 60's on the dance floor. Frank and others are the new customers visiting cannabis stores without any restrictions or guilt.
 
However pain is only one of the applications that has caught the attention of the industry. The relief in epileptic seizures especially among children who have otherwise no effective medicine as reported by Scientific American (January 2016) is a breakthrough, that needs further study. The reversal of Alzheimer is another one. While the pharmaceutical industry clearly sees the sign on the wall, their hands are tied since the Federal law still prohibits the farming and commercialization of these products nationwide, and only "tolerates the business" where the citizens have voted through the ballots and the state has legalized.

While many applaud that cannabis integrated into the black economy, one that generates important tax revenue, few realize how this emerging industry creates a powerful local economy much different than the promise of globalization. Now, the restrictive oversight and control of the Government secures a debilitated competitive pharma force, while strengthening a highly fractionated farming and processing system with thousands of new entrepreneurs who claim their stake. This is the 21st century gold rush and a consolidation of the sector is not in sight. The hippies and the hemp capitalists have the federal regulators to thank.

Time to take initiatives
​
Just a short decade after the gold rush for cannabis started, its economic impact is clearly felt, but its ecological footprint has not been accounted for nor documented in full. Neither has there been a real chance to scientifically document the marvel cannabinoids potentially represent from chronic ache to epileptic seizures. Policy makers have a responsibility to serve society, and ensure that the benefits are shared with millions, not a few. To our surprise, the conditions for the cannabis trade seem to be more democratic than any emerging industry. The emerging corporations are squeezed between the key performance indicators of "growing more and faster all the time to keep up with demand" on one hand, and the very narrowly defined controls from the Government that has not set any ecological

so that the next generation will not look back at this explosive situation with the same dismay as we look at the scars from the gold miners who indiscriminately used mercury as it was the best performing chemical at the time.
​To Conclude
While this short paper ticks only a few of the boxes that need to be addressed for this emerging cannabis trade, it is a broad invitation to the key operators in the industry to embark on a rapid transformation to an emerging business that undoubtedly can and will make a major contribution to the economy, but at the same time applies the science and the engineering that permits these production and commercial facilities will contribute to society and turn into pioneers for the best of humanity. 

Life on earth is a combination of the minuscule and the gigantic: from the cells that build an organ to the body of a sentient being, to the communities we live in, the ecosystems we depend on, and the tiny spot the Earth represents in the Universe. Life is not just a mix of matter, chemistry and biology - it consists of innumerable relations that have unfolded over millions of years of evolution and symbiosis. This “Web of Life” was first described by the Austrian scientist Fritjof Capra. The key characteristic is that the whole (life) is more than the sum of its parts (physics, chemistry and biology), something Leonardo da Vinci already described.
 
We are still in the process of discovering what life is and how it is organized. There are more bacteria living in our mouth than there are people living on earth. There are ten times more viruses in the sea than there are bacteria. There are a million bacteria in one cubic millimeter of seawater. One hundred million viruses descent every day on each square meter of land. Most are released from the waves in the sea into the air. The number of microorganisms in our body equals the number of human cells. No matter how well you wash and scrub, every nook and cranny of your body is covered with microscopic creatures. However, the greatest concentration of this invisible life thrives in the dark depths of our oxygen-deprived intestines.
 
That is where our immune system works with the precision of a nuclear clock following with great discipline each instruction of our genome. This sequence of chemical reactions and biological matter, known as our double helixes, harbors approximately 20,000 rules. While we have determined the structure and the content of the human genome, we still do not fully understand how it works. Our life force depends on these rules which are deployed on autopilot. If we add all the genes of the bacteria, viruses and fungi that call our body their home and that interact with our genes, then we are operating under more than two million “rules”. So if we understand “us”, we still need to grasp “the others” to metabolize food, to trigger a response from our immune system when a virus attacks, and to make vitamins, just to name a few. If we think we can master life through genetic manipulation, gene editing, and modern medicine “killing the bad”, then we should think again.
 
The war against enemies in us
 
Our view of bacteria, viruses and fungi, which determines how we could live happy and healthy, is wrought with ignorance and fear. Unfortunately, we systematically view these microorganisms as enemies. Worse, we are waging an open warfare against them. Antibiotics and vaccines are the weapons we unleash against smallpox, tuberculosis and many more. Yes, it is true that this warfare saved large numbers of lives. But more and more researchers and members of civil society are concerned that our assault on “the bad guys” has done (and is doing) irreparable damage to our good partners with whom we have built up a very effective synergy to promote and enhance life. Success in fighting pathogens has contributed to a whole new set of diseases that we now have to deal with. Worse, we make it impossible for our immune system to operate with its time-proven partners to bind the dangerous viruses, bacteria, and fungi for collecting and clearing debris and dangers.
 
The fight against life around us
 
Our modern day science and engineering does not only fight what is inside us; society embarked on an unparalleled and indiscriminate fight against life that surrounds us. Over the past fifty years we have applied pesticides, herbicides and fungicides as part of a ferocious warfare against anything posing a perceived risk to monoculture crops. Mass cultivation and mass processing of standardized food has been considered indispensable to achieve food security. The fact that we have neglected biodiversity, while not achieving the intended food security, is complemented by statistics that show devastating food, health and biodiversity trends. Somehow these facts have not motivated us to change course. As part of the strategy to achieve food security, the modus operandi pursues the indiscriminate killing of weeds, insects and vermin. Until recently, we did not realize that the pursuit of one objective (producing more food) has had many devastating side effects, including the killing of a whole pyramid of life. While the worst toxins like DDT and asbestos have been banned (in most countries and for most applications, but not all) there are thousands of other molecules that have been licensed for free dispersal. We should have known better.
 
The Failure of Cause and Effect
 
The challenge for regulators is that the approval of a novel product is limited to a simplistic assessment of “the cause and no effect on the health of people, and the health of Nature”. This direct causality may not be easy to prove, or to dismiss when the Web of Life of each living species operates by more than 2 million rules. The mere proposal that one must abide by the “scientific logic” of cause and effect, without considering the real complexity of life, implies an incapacity to deliver proof.
 
The reverberating impact of chemical cocktails on the Web of Life is beyond any doubt. Countries like Germany have reported a decrease of insects over the past 30 years of no less than 70 percent[1]. And while bees have gotten their well deserved attention -and although we still fail to stop their demise-, there are thousands of most beneficial insects, which we cannot even name, that are exterminated without valid reason. This genocide of insects is considered a collateral damage in the fight for food security. Common sense confirms clearly that something is fundamentally wrong. However, how can policy makers move from the statistical proof with a very high degree of certainty that the system is collapsing, to prohibiting one specific synthetic molecule? Under the prevailing rules of the game, it will be impossible to ever stop the onslaught until irreparable damage has woken up civil society at large.
 
From non-GMO crops to biofuels
 
One of the chemical substances that has been under broad scrutiny for decades is glyphosate, the active ingredient of the herbicide Roundup. This is the most extensively applied chemical on GMO and non-GMO crops. It controls weeds and functions as a desiccant of the harvest. While many activists have been concerned with the traces of this herbicide as it travels through the food chain into our body and our excrements, we need to point to the abundance of the raw glyphosate molecule in biofuels. This volatilization of glyphosate is at the core of a chain of adverse effects we are discovering as we write. It is timely to increase awareness and investigate the impact of airborne glyphosate spreading through the air as more biofuels turn into a fixed part of the energy mix. The implications could soon be proven to be as devastating as the technique to mix lead (Pb - plumb) into gasoline. It made the engine run smoother but the volatilization of lead in the air and from there in the web of life through rain, rivers, soil and plants turned into a public health disaster which forced Governments to intervene and prohibit it.
 
Good Intentions with unforeseeable Side Effects
 
The starting point of this unfolding drama is a series of laudable intentions. Governments have been actively promoting biofuels as part of very diverse policies, which each make sense as long as we make abstractions of the unintended consequences. In the 1970s, Brazil wished to reduce its dependence on imported fossil fuels. Since sugar lost its favor with consumers, its massive cane culture that had initially emerged on demolished Atlantic Rainforest land, was transformed into a biofuel industry. The billions invested saved the country billions in foreign currency per year by blending ethanol with petroleum, while it generated thousands of jobs. In 2001, the United States embarked on a deliberate strategy to increase demand for corn by turning it into a fuel. 25% of the American corn fields have been turned into ethanol farms. This additional demand secured higher prices for the farmers, just like the strategy to promote plastics from corn generated an additional boost in prices. The US Government dedicated billions of USD in subsidies each year to convert maize into biofuels and it turned the corn traders into billionaires, while the tortillas, the staple food for poor Mexicans turned prohibitively expensive.
 
Europe committed to reduce carbon emissions to reverse climate change. To do so, Europe decided to convert wasted biomass (excess olive oil production, spent kitchen oil, rapeseed oil, even wood) into fuels. Europe’s ambitions for biofuels far outpaced its capacity to farm and recover oils. Thus, the EU had to import in 2018 nearly four million tons of biofuels full of glyphosates. Much came from GMO Roundup-Ready soybeans (mainly from Argentina) and palm oil (mainly from Indonesia) cultivated on denuded rainforest that destroyed the habitat of the orangutan. Whatever the policy objective was or is, the fact is that all these biofuels burned by cars in Brazil, the USA, and Europe are contaminated with glyphosate. The consequence is that we have unknowingly polluted the air we breath and put an additional stress on our immune system.
 
After the success of biofuel for cars, the airline industry felt the pressure to join the bandwagon. The aviation industry has been actively blending vegetable-based oils into kerosene for over a decade. Los Angeles (LAX) was the first airport in the world to offer aviation biofuel in 2009. In 2011, KLM Royal Dutch Airlines became the first airline to use bio-kerosene made from used cooking oil. United Airlines, American Airlines and Air France joined soon after. The airline corridors are now airborne glyphosate corridors. Is there a correlation between the fact that Brazil, the United States and some European regions score the highest in the consumption of biofuels, and that they have been hit with proportionately more deaths from the coronavirus?
 
It is worth pointing out that Bhutan and Sikkim, the 2 regions of the world committed to 100% organic farming, and where aviation is very restricted have had zero coronavirus deaths reported. It may also be ironic that countries with a powerful oil and gas lobby but without a prevalence of biofuels like Russia and Saudi Arabia have lower incidence of coronavirus deaths - especially compared to Brazil and the USA. These are not proofs of cause and effect which are - as indicated - impossible to demonstrate with the present logic that neglects the system as a whole.
 
Strong Correlations refute Coincidence
​
Glyphosate is the major contaminant that according to its own specifications and permits to be used, is not supposed to be found in food, soil, rivers, lakes, groundwater, blood, urine and breast milk. Unfortunately traces are found  everywhere! Due to the popularity of biofuels this doubtful molecule is increasingly present in the air we breath. It spreads like a virus through air corridors descending on us through rain and wind. Unless you live high up in the Himalayas, no one can be protected from exposure to it. By simply breathing, glyphosate settles in our lung tissue.
 
The correlation between the alarming rise of a series of chronic diseases and the use of glyphosate was confirmed through scientific research with a stunning p-value[2] of less than 0.00001. This indicates that the match between illness and presence of glyphosate is no coincidence[3] at all. An analysis of those who suffered and passed away in Lombardy due to the COVID-19 revealed that 99% of them had a chronic disease, and nearly half suffered from three or more illnesses that correlate with chronic diseases associated with glyphosate[4]. Perhaps we should not insist on social distancing, rather Governments should finally enforce a dramatic reduction of the citizens’ exposure to glyphosate.
 
A growing list of scientific literature suggests that glyphosate may be damaging our lungs in such a way so as to induce an acute response to this new cold virus, leading to extensive damage to the lungs, difficult breathing, and an inability to efficiently clear the virus from the body. The correlation between glyphosate and chronic diseases is so strong that we can advance with certainty the hypothesis that “the degree to which persons are susceptible to COVID-19 is proportional to the degree to which they have been exposed to glyphosate”. Eating a European certified organic diet, staying away from major highways and avoiding the corridors of airplanes running on biokerosene may be among the best tools for protection from an acute reaction to COVID-19. The best response is to increase organic farming as especially Spain, Italy, Austria and the Baltic States are doing.
 
Policy Makers should Adopt a Military Strategy

When military intelligence confirms that an enemy is preparing an attack, then it would be absurd to wait to prepare for and build up a defense strategy until it has been proven that the adversary is belligerent, i.e. the attack has taken place. We cannot claim that it is proven that glyphosate weakens the immune system and damages the lungs and subsequently leads to an acute response to a simple virus. However, it is time to apply military logic. Why wait until it is proven? This should motivate the European Union to finally put a stop to glyphosate, which might very well be one of the key factors to reduce the risk of another pandemic.
 
Of course there will be scientists arguing strongly against this argument. I am prepared to face the threats and abuses because will stand for what I believe is right and people should know. Civil society listens to scientists, collects data, facts, knowledge and wisdom and then decides without fear but with a heart in the interest of the Common Good. Only 0.1% of the population qualifies as a scientist, so it is impossible that this minute number rules over 99.9% of the citizens who wish to pursue a happy and healthy life in harmony with their community and Nature.

Note
I am grateful to Jennifer Margulis for her amazing background research based on peer group reviewed articles. She and Dr. Stephanie Seneff from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) were my key sources in documenting this article.
https://jennifermargulis.net/
 
Footnotes

[1] https://www.dw.com/en/munich-study-confirms-severe-decline-in-insect-populations-in-germany/a-51052955
[2] The smaller the p-value, the stronger the evidence that the null hypothesis should be rejected. A p-value less than 0.05 (typically ≤ 0.05) is statistically significant. It indicates strong evidence against the null hypothesis, as there is less than a 5% probability the null is correct (and the results are random).
[3] https://jeffreydachmd.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Genetically-engineered-crops-glyphosate-deterioration-health-United-States-Swanson-J-Organic-Systems-2014.pdf
[4]  https://www.epicentro.iss.it/coronavirus/bollettino/Report-COVID- 2019 17 marzo-v2.pdf.

References
 
I hereby submit a series of scientific studies that substantiate the arguments advanced in the article above. This is only a small selection of articles reporting on studies undertaken by organizations independent of the pro-glyphosate lobby.
  
FC Chang, MF Simcik, PD Capel. Occurrence and Fate of the Herbicide Glyphosate and its Degradate Aminomethylphosphonic Acid in the Atmosphere. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2011; 30(3): 548-55.
 
A Samsel and S Seneff. Glyphosate’s Suppression of Cytochrome P450 Enzymes and Amino Acid Biosynthesis by the Gut Microbiome: Pathways to Modern Diseases. Entropy 2013; 15: 1416-1463.
 
NL Swanson, A Leu, J Abrahamson, et al. Genetically Engineered Crops, Glyphosate and the Deterioration of Health in the United States of America. J Org Syst 2014; 9: 6-37.
 
T Houben, Y Oligschlaeger, AV Bitorina et al. Blood-derived Macrophages Prone to Accumulate Lysosomal Lipids Trigger oxLDL-Dependent Murine Hepatic Inflammation. Scientific Reports 2917; 7: 12550.
 
R Mesnage, G Renney, G-E Séralini et al. Multiomics Reveal Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in Rats Following Chronic Exposure to an Ultra-low Dose of Roundup Herbicide. Sci Rep 2017; 7: 39328.
 
S Gunatilake, S. Seneff and L. Orlando. Glyphosate’s Synergistic Toxicity in Combination with Other Factors as a Cause of Chronic Kidney Disease of Unknown Origin. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019; 16(15): 2734.
 
WK Ip, KH Chan, HK Law et al. Mannose-binding Lectin in Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus Infection. J Infect Dis 2005; 191: 1697-1704.
 
R-M A Mackay, CL Grainge, LC Lau, et al. Airway Surfactant Protein D Deficiency in Adults With Severe Asthma. Chest. 2016 May; 149(5): 1165–1172.
 
DS Thakur, R Khot, PP Joshi et al. Glyphosate Poisoning with Acute Pulmonary Edema. Toxicol Int. 2014; 21(3): 328-330.
 
S Kumar, M Khodoun, EM Kettleson et al. Glyphosate-rich Air Samples Induce IL-33, TSLP and Generate IL-13 Dependent Airway Inflammation. Toxicology. 2014; 0: 42-51.
 
P Mehta, DF McAuley, M Brown et al. COVID-19: Consider Cytokine Storm Syndromes and Immunosuppression. Lancet 2020; 395: 1033-134.
 
SM Alif, SC Dharmage, G Benke et al. Occupational Exposure to Pesticides are Associated with Fixed Airflow Obstruction in Middle-age. Thorax 2017; 72(11): 990-997.
 
R Lozano, M Naghavi, K Foreman et al. Global and Regional Mortality from 235 Causes of Death for 20 Age Groups in 1990 and 2010: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 2012; 380: 2095-128.
 
Lombardy: Red Light for Diesels until March 2019. Wanted In Milan. April 3, 2020. https://www.wantedinmilan.com/news/lombardy-red-light-for-diesels-until-march-2019.html.

When you wage a war against injustice (or a virus), then you mobilize everyone.  The fight against the coronavirus has been exceptional for two reasons:

1. 3/4 of the world population is immobilized by political decision, requested to stay at home and do nothing
2. Today there are more casualties from the side effects from the attempts to contain the virus than caused by the virus. 

The observations are summarized in 2 editorials:  1. When you fight a war ....  2. From unintended consequences to collateral damage. 

I look forward to receive your feedback. ​

Syndicated Article by Gunter Pauli
 
The arrival of the coronavirus came as a complete surprise. Every government was caught with its pants down, incapable to react, exposing how unprepared public services were. It felt like a stealth attack, invisible at first, everywhere the next moment. This unpleasant surprise was accompanied by myopic social and broadcast media that only monitor a few numbers while repeating instructions threatening with fines. This hard reality offered the ideal conditions for causing panic and obedience. When faced with despair then hardly anyone uses common sense. Emotions trigger a series of decisions and enforce behaviors which history will judge very harsh. When the World Health Organization declared a pandemic the political leadership did not wait to make the most drastic decisions ever: a lockdown of (nearly) the whole world. The following six observations should guide us towards a positive way forward.
 
1. The pandemic had been announced in very clear terms.
 
Void of any conspiracy theory, the Harvard Institute of Global Health had presented in January 2019 at the World Economic Forum a stinging report: pandemics will overwhelm us due to excessive pollution, excessive population density and climate change. The authors warned that Governments had to prepare themselves. These warning were not taken serious. Once the pandemic hit, societies at large were incapable to handle the rapidly rising demands for medical services and palliative care.
 
2. The Over-Confident European Union acted totally uncoordinated
 
While the EU tightly controls budget deficits and member states’ debt the only response it could imagine to the pandemic was to let each country decide to keep citizens like rabbits in their hutches like France, Belgium, Spain and Italy, or to let them regulate themselves like Sweden did. With its combined annual spend of €1.5 trillion the EU considered that its health care system would be able to handle any situation. Europeans for the first time since the Second World War had to queue at the emergency entrance of hospitals. African, Asian and Latin American nations face this reality every time another Dengue outbreak hits their communities.
 
Every year 400 million people are infected by the Dengue virus for which there is no vaccine. Then hospitals are overrun like Europe witnessed. More people die annually of Dengue than even the worst coronavirus scenarios predict. The world remains unmoved! The European industrial and social powerhouse faced a third world reality.
  
3. Experts take over when everyone is in despair
 
While it is wise and necessary to take counsel, one cannot only depend on the virologist. Indeed the virus expert only sees viruses. Virologists know that they spread fast. Every day on every square meter some 100 million viruses descend, transported by air streams from continent to continent. There are ten times more viruses than bacteria on earth. How can you protect anyone from viruses? Now if you decide to protect, then you can lock-down and only slow down infection rates. Over time without exception nearly 100% of the people will be exposed. If you know that everyone will be exposed anyway, why asphyxiate the economy? Or, was this lockdown necessary to cover-up the incapacity to handle a real fast hitting pandemic?
  
4. Mobilize everyone against the common enemy
 
This war against a virus is the first war in history where by political decision everyone is de-mobilized. This is an amazing situation. Confined at home, forced to stay put for months, arousing panic and fear, being forced to listen to experts like Dr. Anthony Fauci from the United States who owns vaccine patents and promotes a lockdown until the vaccine is available that will make him very rich. We should have mobilized everyone, instead we have immobilized nearly everyone, except medical staff.
  
5. Mobilize, Connect and Exercise
 
We need an immediate mobilization at two levels. First the best way to protect yourself from any viral or bacterial infection is to exercise. If  muscles are not used for months, then bones and joints will weaken, the oxygen in the lungs insufficiently refreshed, bacterial plaque and biofilm will build up. Under these conditions everyone, especially children confined to computer screens are prone to succumb to the next wave of viral and bacterial attacks!
 
The same is true for our immune system. Without continuously exposing yourself to the wealth of microorganisms descending from the air, shared through water and food, spread through love, care, cuddling, hugging and kissing, then the immune system will weaken. Lockdowns weaken the immune system! The AIDS virus kills annually 800,000 people and no vaccine exists. Has any government prohibited intimacy? Everyone must exercise and ensure regular contacts with friends and family. Inactivity and lack of exposure to the sun represents a risk to the individual health I would impose fines on every able individual who is not exercising daily.
 
6. Unleash Entrepreneurship
 
The most important mobilization to get out of the mess we are in, is to wake up the entrepreneurial spirit that all have in us. We will witness a dramatic drop in GDP, we will have record high unemployment rates especially amongst youth and immigration will only be suppressed by force. We need to urgently list the 1000+1 activities every home, every city quarter, every village requires every day in order to live healthy and happy. This is the opportunity for an amazing renaissance of the entrepreneurs we desperately need to relaunch the economy with all available resources.
 
These entrepreneurs have a clear focus on responding to all basic needs, rebuilding communities, strengthening resilience, unleashing the creative mind that has been at the origin of every artifact around us. We should  refrain from discussing “who was right and who is the culprit”? We need to inspire a whole population and generation that is now in panic mode impressed by al little zombie (the virus). Only concrete steps that move quickly from idea to vision using the best of science wisdom will convince people to transform the reality around us. Thus, we evolve from vision to new business models that serve people and not capital.

Syndicated Article by Gunter Pauli May 16, 2020

When decisions are made in haste, seldom can one foresee all the consequences. Whatever the impact beyond the original objective of eliminating “the bad”, (he spread of a virus), are considered unintended consequences. However, once the facts are on the table, and the adverse side-effects are documented, it is necessary to take corrective measures. If the decision-maker knows that actions taken deeply affect the livelihood of people beyond the original objective, and takes no steps to mitigate the negative impact, then these are no longer unintended consequences, International Law qualifies these, as collateral damage.

We must remind ourselves that the International Court of Justice qualifies unintended effects as collateral damage based on three parameters: (1) necessity, (2) distinction, (3) proportionality. First the court determines if the inflicted pain was necessary and unavoidable under the circumstances.

Then it asserts if the decisions were made intentionally to achieve a specific objective (reduce number of people infected) and differentiated from the adverse impact on the rest of the population. Finally, the numbers of the adverse effects (especially death toll) must be considerably less compared with the benefits obtained for society at large (number of people saved).

While everyone recognizes that these three conditions are up for arbitrary interpretations, the following assessment indicates that an overwhelming majority of the policy makers lack understanding of the collateral damage they have caused (and are causing) in the process of trying to handle this pandemic.

Worse, it seems that some policy makers decided to wage an ideological war “to protect the people” ignoring the facts that they are causing even more damage beyond their objectives. Let us look at reality before us.

1. The UN warns: 1.2 million children could die in the next six months

Three quarters of the world’s children live in a country with a stay-at-home order. This unleashed the most lethal hazard of the pandemic: fear. Hospitals around the world report that they are empty, except for the emergency ward converted into a coronavirus ward. Midwives do not deliver babies anymore, expectant mothers are scared to get too close, and routine check-ups for mother and child have collapsed in most countries. Expecting mothers, parents of young children, simply do not go to the doctor anymore out of fear, or when they do it is too late. 

The mass media creates a psychosis of fear with singular and even obsessive attention on four simplistic numbers pertaining to: (1) the number of people infected; (2) the number of patients in intensive care; (3) the number of people recovered; and, (4) the number of people who passed away. However the handling of the pandemic translates into harsh new statistics which are never reported: the child mortality rate caused by the decisions to contain the virus. John Hopkins University (USA) estimates that an additional 1.2 million children could die before their fifth birthday in the next 6 months! The mortality rate of mothers will increase by one third. This is the worst absolute number since 1960. This translates into1.5 million fatalities (and rising), 5 times the present death toll of the virus (and rising).

Politicians who claim “to save the poor from imminent death” are de facto condemning people to lead a life in fear and cause a death toll higher than the impact of the virus. This is collateral damage.

2. 135 million people are marching towards the brink of starvation

The imposition of a house arrest that confines as a standard 10 people to 20 square meters in shanty towns without running water or access to any food with the police enforcing the lockdown creates disastrous living conditions. The lockdowns are blocking access to food and water. These measures also keep poor people from earning their daily allowance, especially single mothers who make a living cleaning and cooking. Street vendors who provide a cushion in the economy for the poorest of the poor saw their client base evaporate. The perishable goods they used to sell straight from the farms are rotting away, depriving the countryside of much needed cash to survive. 

Social distancing has disastrously slashed their income to zero. The world is facing a pandemic-induced hunger wave. The United Nations statistics added in May 2020 more than 135 million people suffering from hunger! The UN expects that a prolongation of the lockdown will double the number. Which means that in 2020 the world will count 1.15 billion people suffering from hunger, up from 880 million just one year ago. The subsequent dramatic growth in malnutrition leads to a death toll ten times higher from hunger caused by policies that were intended to protect people from the coronavirus. This is collateral damage.

3. Death from Suicide and Home Violence outpaces Coronavirus.

While pandemic-induced deaths described above may affect mainly Africa, Asia and Latin America, the third unfolding drama is suicide and home violence. This is even the worst in Europe and North America. First, the lockdown forces millions of women to be confined in a limited space with their abusers. Second, it has been estimated that the number of suicides hits all-time high. The number these victims in half of the 118 countries that impose a strict stay-home orders and social distancing is more than victims of the coronavirus. 

The case of Colombia is shocking: with only 525 recorded fatalities from the virus to date, the estimated number of additional suicides and home murders is at least double that! Still the Mayor of Bogota fights the Central Government to permit a real opening of the country and the economy. Home violence reaches now a “guesstimate" of more than 100 per 100,000 citizens in Bogota (from 69/100,000 reported in 2015). 

One third of the violence harms children. We are talking about 3,000 additional severe cases of violence caused by this mandatory lockdown of people in homes as small as 20 square meters! The number of suicides is estimated to double in the age group most affected by this dramatic lockdown: 500 young men between 20-24!

The increase in the total number of suicides in Colombia will surpass by those who succumbed to the virus. We have to be very careful with the number of suicides and fatalities from home violence since most Governments censure the media. Informal data gathering seem to confirm that the numbers are shooting through the roof, but the media is prohibited from reporting such facts. The censure and oppression of real news is worse than the spreading of fake news. How can politicians stick rigidly to the forced stay-home and even obsessive social distancing to fight the virus when the statistics from suicide and violence outnumber the oversimplified statistics of the virus. This is collateral damage.

4. The mafia is taking control of the situation.

The strict lockdown imposed by Governments cuts the revenues of criminal organizations (the mafia) whose traditional income from prostitution, drugs and extortion are crippled by the lockdown. This “gain" is fraught with complacency. The mafia always gains force when in crisis. The stay-at-home order eliminates income for those who live day by day. The incapacity to get to the street “to sell, clean car windows or steal” creates a painful shortage of cash. The mafia is a willing lender, especially to micro enterprises. They bankroll the operators of fledgling street businesses who are left without any clients. The mafia provides loans, organizes food, cellphone time, customers and deliveries. Then asks those who received money to hire someone, a favor that is difficult to refuse. Within no time the new person will manage the business with or without the will of the owner. The beneficiary of the “generous loans” is converted into a front man. The mafia will exploit position, relations, government funding and banking relations. Once the situation shifted, prostitution, drugs and extortion will count on a new web of business. 

Fresh fruits are rotting away, medical supplies are in short supply due to closed airports, hence the mafia will undertake an aggressive move to control the supply chain of fruits, vegetables and medical supplies. The counterfeiting, substandard masks, gloves and pharmaceuticals, plus risky farm pick-ups and home deliveries buys allegiance and dependency. This is not collateral damage but a major loss for civil society. Politicians who pretend “to save the poor”, actually hand them over to the mafia! Continue to contain the virus without collateral damage. 

Governments must face that they are responsible for collateral damage and the increased power of the mafia. The number of deaths caused due to hunger, lack of sought medical services, suicide and home violence as a direct result of the (mis)management of the pandemic by far outnumbers the individuals who succumbed to the virus.

The trends are getting worse by the day. As a result, it is urgent to curb the negative impacts with smart decisions. Governments which refuse to correct the course one day could be judged in Court for knowingly causing unnecessary harm causing a death toll that is blatantly disproportionate to the original intentional objective and fostered the rise of the mafia. Since the information is out, no politician can pretend “That he or she did not know”!

For more information you can download for free “100 Questions” (available in English, French, Italian and Spanish.)

Article by Gunter Pauli
July 1999

Introduction to the Re-Publication 21 years later

When this article caught my eyes in this period of lockdowns, I realized what a methodological approach can teach us about envisioning the future. Here were my observations over two decades ago when I was preparing the present the concept of the Blue Economy and the standard where zero emissions and zero waste is the starting point - not an end objective.

1. Economics is not a science. Unfortunately now I have to conclude that many of the traditional sciences like biology and chemistry are in urgent need of a fundamental revision. As I have stated, most diplomas that are more than 20 years old have surpassed their expiration date. There is a need for a fundamental overhaul of what we teach our children.

2. Pollution as a parameter of success. Amazing we have exploited the Commons to the point of its collapse and the few pockets of Nature left are threatened because our goal was to protect, and we never had a standard requiring to regenerate.

3. Go Beyond Reduction. Indeed we need a business model that regenerates, uses what is locally available and ensures the resilience in communities to respond to all basic needs.
​
So I invite you to read this article and perhaps pay special attention to the section on page 16, dedicated to infectious diseases. The text in blue are my updates.

One line in particular caught my attention: "... shift from palm oil to other oil crops is not a solution as it may lead to further biodiversity loss”. My immediate reaction was wanting to know who funded this report? A decade ago, IUCN accepted a million dollars from Syngenta, the European leader in genetically modified seeds (now controlled by Chinese capital), with their blunt strategy to control food production – in total disregard of its impact on biodiversity. To me this report on palm oil appeared like yet another sell-out to corporate interests.
 
The issue of palm oil has been at the top of my agenda since 1993, when on a visit to Malaysia and Indonesia I witnessed the massive destruction of rainforests to make way for palm plantations. The argument then (and being repeated today), was that oil palm produces up to nine times more oil per acre than any other oil crop. As a high-profile producer of biodegradable soaps made from palm oil at the time, I immediately realized that the products produced in my green factory, one constructed from
wood, with employees cycling to work, was not sustainable at all. I was mortified that, by using palm oil, I was responsible for the destruction of the rainforest and the habitat of the orangutan.
 
There is no way to justify producing palm oil, and IUCN now stretches the argument that the only oil that could respond to rising demand is palm oil, as other less productive crops will require even more forest destruction and would therefore be a greater danger to biodiversity. Over the last two decades, I have been working hard at convincing others to correct this misguided logic of using palm oil (for which I had also fallen, until I came face to face with the reality) that as a monoculture of a non-native species, it completely destroys the habitat of these primates. 

Even the certified sustainable corporates (including Unilever) refuse to sacrifice productivity and rejected the proposal of leaving a reserve of a one kilometer-wide corridor of land along rivers untouched, to provide a refuge to the remaining populations of orangutan and pygmy elephant (a subspecies of the Asian elephant).
 
The core logic advanced by IUCN centers around productivity. For decades, environmental economists have argued unsuccessfully that many industries produce numbers without considering the externalized costs. For example, the demise of existing alternative oil plantations that succumb in this competitive game controlled by a few giants in addition to the biodiversity loss, is not considered in any calculations. The fact that "we put an orangutan in our tank", blending palm oil in gasoline (especially in Europe) only worsens the overall impact of palm oil IUCN is now lending itself to offer a blanket of legitimacy.
 
The greatest surprise, however, is that IUCN does not mention natural marine oils. The sea covers 70% of Earth, and when we view this three-dimensionally, the immense amount of space it offers represents more than 98% of the useful area of the planet for cultivation.
 
There are an estimated 5,000 species of macro-algae, and scientists agree that at least 3,000 species have not yet been studied or described. The species that we already know of are capable of producing a multiple of the 2.7 tons of palm oil per hectare per year, which IUCN claims is the most productive on Earth. This claim is, unfortunately, unsubstantiated, as the most productive oil crop is derived from seaweed.
  
This high level of oil productivity of seaweed, of minimum 10 tons of oil per hectare, is easily explained: firstly, photosynthesis in the water focuses on growth – without a gravity counterforce. Secondly, kelp forests grow in three dimensions, easily reaching 25 meters in height, in a high population concentration. Thirdly, the rich Arctic and Tropical currents provide a food density that is 700 times higher than if grown in air and soil on land.

Another benefit of seaweed cultivation is that, apart from oil, it also produces biogas and fertilizer. Next, and most interesting, and the opposite of palm oil: various seaweed species are pioneer species, which aid in restoring marine resources that have been overfished and have become over-loaded with plastics. Seaweed cultivation offers us an opportunity to regenerate marine forests and (re)discover its rich biodiversity.
 
The ZERI Network has embarked on numerous seaweed cultivation initiatives around the world, the first one in Zanzibar, Pemba and Mafia already in 1993. Our scientists, entrepreneurs and financiers aim to transform the present economic model and offer a future where we respond to the increased demand for food security – while ensuring restoration where damage has been caused through a lack of understanding of the negative impact of our actions in the past, which had unintended consequences.
 
From the moment we realize that harm has been done, we become responsible for the collateral damage caused, and we become responsible for reversing it, and taking steps to restore our forests, on land and in the sea. How can IUCN justify collateral damage caused by the stance they take on palm oil, and not take responsibility for the consequences, nor propose real solutions we desperately need?
 
We invited IUCN to provide information on the funding and suggested a dialogue on oil from seaweed. The management at different levels has remained mute to all our attempts to reach out and to jointly study the better options for biodiversity offered by the sea. This provides impetus to put further pressure on IUCN to come clean on this blanket approval of palm oil. After all, it is high time we stop putting orangutans in our tank!

​At the beginning of August this year, Mr Sebastian Piñera, the recently re-elected President of Chile, sent a law to Congress that gives the South Pacific island, formerly known as Easter Island, back its original name: Rapa Nui. This renaming took nearly three centuries after the island, which has become
famous for its massive carved stone heads, the moai, was named Easter Island by Dutch explorer Jacob Roggeveen, when he chanced upon it on Easter Day in 1722. 

A return to its original name, and the right of Rapa Nui’s inhabitants to determine access to the island, is only a first step in the right direction. The next step, and one that is much more challenging, requires the involvement of the international community in returning dignity to the islanders, and showing them the respect they deserve for their culture and traditions.

A serious controversy, one filled with drama that caught the attention of the world, sprouted from the bestselling book Collapse by Jared Diamond, in which he describes how grand cultures disappear. One of his most epochal cases is the degeneration of Rapa Nui. His explanation, summarised in a few key concepts, is based on overpopulation and the overexploitation of natural resources through deforestation. Clans that were incapable of reconciling due to ego, as well as misguided efforts to produce those grand monoliths, aggravated the situation and resulted in extreme hunger and cannibalism. Exactly the kind of drama that would unfold before your eyes in a Hollywood movie…

A recent scientific interpretation of the fate of Rapa Nui may well paint Diamond’s theories as ‘fake news’. Other scholars have pointed to the destruction of the ecosystem as mainly due to the arrival of rats, which made their way over centuries from Vietnam, and ate the seed of indigenous palms, preventing propagation. Colonisers also enslaved the local people and decimated the population, if not by excessive force, then through the introduction of diseases.

Through the use of modern forensic technology, the facts have been now laid bare. While sensational information regarding the denuding the island and cannibalism gets all the attention, the true facts of slavery and the introduction of rats hardly make for good front-page coverage. This does not contain sufficient drama. As a result, the tourists who now enter the island, may well regard the locals as survivors of a self-inflicted disaster.

The inhabitants of Rapa Nui merit restorative justice – and more. They deserve to have the effects of man-made environmental disasters reversed and corrected. The Rapa Nui lived for centuries off sun, sea, and soil. They have the indigenous wisdom to their island turned into a shining example of the regeneration of an ecosystem, and their community into one that is deserving of its true history.

Time is of the essence. There is no time for ceremonies nor joint declarations, and certainly not for extensive or expensive studies. The 6,000 strong local population of Rapa Nui now needs to become self-sufficient as it used to be within this modern society that self-inflicts climate change, overfishing and plastics in the sea. They are in need of pragmatic actions that respond to their basic needs for water, food, energy, shelter,employment, health services and education.

Rapa Nui should take its future under its own wings, and start with the immediate creation of a local power and water company, one that is 100% owned by the locals. The financing  can be guaranteed through a budget based on the import of diesel and gas. If that total is capitalised for ten years and converted into its present value there is a capacity to pay back. Add to this number the Government subsidies along the same accounting rules, and this will offer a cash amount for investment, one that surpasses the need of implementing a solar, hydrogen and kite power generation. Every roof of every
dwelling could be used for solar panels, and for rainwater harvesting. Everyone joins in. The ownership is local. This is not an act of rebellion, nor a first step in a declaration of independence, this is taking responsibility where others have failed to respond to the basic needs for over a century.

As the global plastic pollution crisis is unfolding in this part of the Pacific as well, thousands of tons of polymers can be collected and converted into fuel through pyrolysis. This landed waste is good for 20% of all power supply on the island. Then a mere one square kilometre of seaweed cultivation will provide sufficient gas for everyone, while generating about one hundred jobs. The solids from the gasification process provide a rich fertiliser, one urgently needed to restore the soil. As soon as all 5,000 vehicles are fueled by gas or electricity, the island will surpass the success of the grand case of El Hierro, the first island to become self-sufficient in providing water and power, for a population of 5,600 people. Their infrastructure permitted to expansion of over 10,000 inhabitants. The substitution of imported fuel by wind was so successful that all bank loans were repaid 12 years early. Rapa Nui deserves this approach.

In parallel to the basic infrastructure, there is also a need for fresh food. The island, of a 163 square kilometres, offers sufficient area to feed 25,000 people – provided the agricultural ‘experts’ refrain from introducing monocultures and animal feedlots. A smart agricultural system, which cascading nutrients, energy and matter will produce abundant fruit, vegetables, feed and meat. A local boutique slaughterhouse processes meat cuts according to local taste and offers local fish for extraordinary nutritious meals. Only a limited number of tourists are permitted on the island. We witnessed the high contribution to jobs and income when Bhutan applied strict conditions, justified by the fragile environment, and the need for wealth creation that values indigenous culture. This economic development philosophy brings all Rapa Nui around the table.

The marine vessel, Race for Water, will arrive on Rapa Nui early September this year. It is on its second around-the-world voyage – solely using the sun, seawater and the wind (kite) to produce power and water to tour the world. The President of Chile honoured us with a visit to the boat with five Chilean Ministers and the Lady Governor of Rapa Nui.

The ZERI Foundation created by the author of this article, and Race for Water are there to ensure that everyone can meet around a portfolio of timely solutions – ones that the Rapa Nui are ready to implement and fund through legacy investors. Who would not be prepared to stand with the Rapa Nui – to change the story of the past by charting the course of the future?

The ZERI Network will create a platform ZERI Pacifico, registered in Rapa Nui to support the design, implementation and financing of the strategy forward as described in the article above.

For an update on the Race 4 Water please consult: www.raceforwater.org

For information about ZERI and the Blue Economy go to: www.zeri.org - www.theblueeconomy.org

When, on August 12, 2018, the frustrations of a group of dis-empowered fisherman boiled over after one man was killed, protest action led to the office and the residence of a Fisheries Department official in the outskirts of Cape Town being set on fire. This senseless violence and aggression, and the subsequent looting, is being condemned by the whole nation. The destruction of public property and the endangering of the lives of officials will lead to prosecution and prison time.

The question is how the collapse of public order could be explained? What drove the coloured people, who had ancestral rights to these fishing grounds for centuries, to turn to destruction? Let us remind the reader that the Cape is home to the descendants of one of the First World Nations, the Khoi and the San cultures. Indigenous people have practiced sustainable fishing along these coasts for millennia. Even during the Apartheid years the traditional rights to these fishing grounds were upheld.

Demand for seafood – like tuna, and especially luxury items such as rock lobsters and abalone – is rapidly rising. National Governments, like that of South Africa, saw a unique opportunity to generate revenue and have "professionalized" the fishing industry. Licenses to fish are granted to large  corporations disregarding the ancient rights. It appears that only those well advised by legal experts who reserved "parts of the action" to Black Empowerment Groups, who had historically never fished, got quotas. This analysis is shared by Dr. Mamphela Ramphele, a former Managing Director of the World Bank and Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cape Town.

The exclusion of all the local fishermen resulted in a major uproar. The operators of small boats, which based on local investigations with the community used to earn US$ 500 to US$ 800 per day, supporting a dozen families, made their frustrations known. The corporates offered them jobs. Their ancient fishing rights were replaced by a salary of barely US$ 300 per month (and this only during the fishing season). This in reality “guaranteed” that poaching would take place, as it is the only way of survival. From here onwards, the vicious spiral of dismantling of trust, and the desperate search for economic survival – combined with a black market for produce that pays a premium for out of season harvests –leads to the decimation of fish stocks, leaving an ecosystem incapable of producing sustainably. In the meantime, the local market is flooded with deep-frozen Argentinian shrimp and expensive Norwegian salmon – marketed as trendy and healthy.

Few people realise how globalisation has created a transparent pricing on the black market. This is leading to the total annihilation of tuna, abalone and lobsters in the Cape. As the sources turn more scarce, the price increases, which spurs the locals to accelerate over-harvesting, ensuring a total collapse. We have seen this pattern elsewhere. Few Europeans like to be reminded of the fact that the North Sea between Scotland, England, Belgium and the Netherlands once was home to 20,000 square kilometres of oysters. All were eaten, causing murky waters ever since. No steps were ever taken to redress the destruction of this ecosystem.

While there is no short term solution, there are long term options that work. This applies to South Africa, but is relevant for the thousands of fishing communities facing exactly the same dilemma. The steps are pragmatic, require discipline and an intergenerational approach. Reversing destruction does take time.

The first step is to declare no entry zones where fish can safely breed. Secondly, there is an absolute ban on fishing large female fishes with eggs. A yellowfin tuna needs 10 years to become fertile, and a 20-year old female produces millions of eggs. Everyone agrees to catch and release all mature females. Thus, the nets are replaced by lines. Each fish, lobster and abalone caught gets a tag with a GPS code when it emerges from the sea. This controls middlemen who cheat the whole system (both the large corporations and the traditional fishermen).

This program was implemented first in El Hierro (Canary Islands, Spain) and today fish density is ten times the average of Spain. The local fishing community, "La Restinga" looks like a higher-middle class town. The reversal is possible – provided one permits Nature to bounce back, just before its total collapse.

The ZERI Foundation (a network of 38 organisations) has accompanied fishing communities in Spain to ensure first their survival, and next their economic development with a strong identity. Now, the network of experts and entrepreneurs is committed to assist Rapa Nui (Easter) Island pursuing the same endeavors.

Who is Gunter Pauli?
 
The Huffington Post called him "The Steve Jobs of Sustainability". His Latin American friends rather call him "The Che Guevara of Sustainability". He prefers no reference to anyone who already passed away, and wants to be judged by his children only.
 
He has the ears of the CEOs of leading mining companies and is about to unveil his new model for extracting ores, especially gold from the ground that will triple the miners' cash flow and turn these formally brutal dynamite explosions into a surgical intervention. The Return on Investment is so good, that mining executives who have known Gunter for years believe that this could be the real revolution with share prices coming out of the deep (most lost +50% in one year) to triple and quadruple. The numbers are solid, the innovations have been proven, and the model is being tested as we speak in the Americas.
 
He partners with leading oil companies in Europe to help them get rid of their stranded assets. All investments in oil, gas and petrochemicals from the sixties and seventies are at the end of their useful life. Over-investments in Saudi-Arabia and China, plus the prospect of low crude prices for a few years more stalls investment. There are +100 petrochemical installations up for closure in Europe alone, but the social and environmental cost is too high, and the margins are too low to permit investments in a reconversion of the sector. Gunter sees great opportunities and a company he chairs in Italy have already transformed 5 petrochemical facilities into profitable operations. At the request of the Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, and in collaboration with ENI, this revival of competitiveness is considered so strategic for Europe that it is directly supported by the Presidency of the EU Commission.
 
The Belgian Government is open to his advise on how to transform the threat of rising sea levels while stimulating the creation of new industries. His proposal will be unveiled later this year, but is based on 3D sea farming that has been pioneered in China over centuries. Gunter believes that producing food 2D on land is out of date, time has come to massively produce food, feed, fuel, fertilizers and chemical feedstock from the sea. The first plant operates in South Africa, the Indonesian Government is offering 100 square kilometer concessions and the Belgian Government is ready to change the laws. The first operations are up and running in the United States, and dozens more are coming on stream.
 
The Chinese Government appreciates his hands-on approach. When a Taiwanese inventor converted rocks and plastics to paper for packaging and print, Gunter put his network behind this breakthrough that requires no water, no tree cutting and offers paper that can be recycled forever. Four factories in 4 years have demonstrated that this is not just a good idea, this is a new standard that will totally upset the forest, paper and pulp industry. It's better, it's cheaper and makes sense. Dozens of delegations from around the world visit the plants and soon (stone) paper plants will emerge in South Africa, Mongolia, Egypt ... all nations void of water and trees!
 
Gunter manages a loyal network of 3,000 researchers, keen on seeing their innovations put into practice. He also works with 850 doers, people keen to get their hands dirty. While these industrial projects that have mobilized $4 billion in investments the past few years, his biggest impact may well be in education. He agreed to produce for Chinese schools (cooperation with the Ministry of Environment Protection, Ministry of Education and the Normal Universities) a total of 365 fables bringing children a new reality (like "Paper made from Stone") that even the parents consider "fantasy". He has already produced and published 108 in China and has another 7 years to finish the rest. These books are now test-run in 5,000 schools and will soon go nationwide. The number of fables in Chinese schools (and elsewhere), make his "Blue Economy" book that sold 1.2 million copies in 39 languages look like a bummer.
 
He started as a small entrepreneur in Japan, then moved back to Belgium, created 12 companies in 12 years (2 failed) and was hired by the United Nations University in 1994 with the support the Japanese Government to help prepare the Kyoto Protocol. None of his proposals were accepted back in 1997. However, with the support of 2,600 corporations and a few game-changers in the UN, he decided to pursue his design of highly innovative business models that 20 years later offer a fresh look at how industry will compete, how the poor can join a thriving middle class, how we can respond to basic needs of all with what we have, and how regional development will outcompete the globalized economy.
 
His think tank ZERI has been ranked by the University of Pennsylvania as one of the most innovative in the world (#7 in 2016) and having interacted with over 100 heads of government, and with 200 projects implemented he knows how to translate science and innovation into disruptive business models and pragmatic government policies by generating more cash flow than even hedge funds consider possible.
 
"I have never been against GMO, petroleum or globalization. I am on a permanent quest to find much better!" Gunter Pauli
 
The question to be asked, reading this background: "Does this man consider himself a rebel?"
 
Here are his reflections on the question asked by Ilaria Bonacorsi of the Italian magazine "Left".
 
First: Stop Being a Diplomat
 
When the Ambassador of Belgium in Tokyo told me in 1981 that I should rewrite my report about how Belgian companies could penetrate the Japanese company, after I had rewritten it twice, I told him to write it himself and left for Italy to participate in the Club of Rome meeting organized by Dr. Aurelio Peccei, former CEO of FIAT and Olivetti. Little did I know that a diplomat was not permitted to leave his posting overseas without the permission of the Ambassador. When I sent a summary of my vision of how to do business in Japan to Baron Daniel Jansen, member of the Club of Rome and president of the Belgian Federation of Enterprises he confided that "these ideas are not mainstream but since nothing else has worked, we should give it a try".
 
This encouragement led to the creation of my first enterprise in 1981 in Tokyo, dedicated to implementing the vision I had, selling beer, chocolate and fine linen textiles, and soon after I succeeded in licensing Belgian pharmaceutical patents to Japanese enterprises, closing joint-ventures and coordinating direct investments. The Japanese took notice of this success and took the bold step to promote my initiatives overseas claiming that: "if this young entrepreneur can succeed, why can't large European and American companies?" An independent career was born, and a rebel imposed himself on the market. It was Aurelio Peccei who had argued that I should never work for a multinational and certainly not for the government and preserve at all cost my freedom to think and act as I considered best for all.
 
You have a Chance when you start Young with Mother's unconditional support
 
When the Huffington Post (France) named me in 2014 "The Steve Jobs of Sustainability", my Latin American friends were quick to respond that I should be named "The Che Guevara of Sustainability". Perhaps they were right, since I would never worry to please, rather always worry about doing what is considered the best for all, often upsetting many who would feel the pinch from this out of the box thinker and doer who pursues a clear vision: create a better world with what we have. It all started at a very young age when I was reading about the genocide of the Native Americans and decided that I should go to the United States to rescue whatever and who ever could be rescued. Barely 8 years old, I pledged to save all money and depart at the age of 18. Luckily, my mother fully supported this crazy dream and indeed upon graduating from high school I left for Nebraska where once the Sioux roamed the land. A rebel with a cause … and patience.
 
Only Worry About the Others' Weaknesses (and there are many)
 
One year later I returned to my motherland, frustrated but ready to embrace the realities of life knowing that sometimes it is not worth fighting for a lost cause. Rebels fights for the cause they (believe) can win, even when the chances are small. Where would we get the clarity from that this is worth pursuing? It was during my early years in Japan that Mr. Shoichiro Honda explained that he never studied business, and never undertook strategic assessments like the SWOTS analysis (strengths and weaknesses, opportunities and threats). As a fresh Master in Business Administration from a fine European school (INSEAD, France) I questioned how he could decide on a pathway for his company without knowing his strengths. How could he decide to produce cars when his only experience was motorcycles? His answer was compelling and has guided me ever since: "I have no strengths, and my list of weaknesses is long. However, when I make the list of weaknesses of my competitors and opponents, it is even longer and that gives me the courage to pursue what I think is best".
 
Fantasy for Others is My Reality
 
I realized that Mr. Honda was as much a rebel as Che Guevara whose silhouette adorned my bedroom during my teenage years, much to the dismay of my father who thought that communists will destroy the Western culture. When he destroyed our family nucleus by escaping to Iran with another woman after 28 years of marriage, I learned that his betrayal was my greatest chance in life: take care of mom. Rebels realize that in every bad news, there is good news. My mother who had encouraged me to hold on to my dreams for a decade, and who welcomed me after I realized it was a pipedream, deserved the unconditional love from her son, just like this son had an unconditional commitment to steering this world towards a much better horizon. It seems that rebels not only go for the impossible, with passion and perseverance, but that they are surrounded by an unconditional love that offers faith and clarity that few seem to have in their quest to achieve what other often consider as fantasy.
 
Rebels do not live in a world of fantasy. Their world is one filled with realities, and realities they want to change. The main challenge is that everyone else in society considers these realities fantasy. The rebel has the unique capability to not only take what others consider fantasy as their reality; they are capable to go beyond their dreams. That is what gives them the courage to continue on their evolutionary path throughout life, taking one strategic breakthrough after another without ever being concerned about the pitfalls that are known to cause trouble and pain. The rebel does not face up to problems, rather avoids them, sailing around, picking up force and speed from adversaries. And all the inflicted pains are considered a passage that allows soul searching for the inner truth and strengths towards a next phase of action. A real rebel does not operate in terms of war games with battles lost and battles won, rather a rebel sees nothing but opportunities, avoiding confrontation ensuring regular surprise flipping flashes of a transformation that are presented as if the rebels lives an atmosphere of toys and sweets. This explains why rebels hardly meet objections rather transform the complex in something clear and simple, even when it is not, savoring the sympathy, especially from the arts.
 
The Arts: A Rebel's Logic
 
Rebels translate complex situations into a clear logic, insensitive to though aware of the staunch opposition from vested interests, which are overcome through minimum winning coalitions. Rebels never look for a majority, knowing that the silent majority will only join when the shift is inevitable, and never before. The rebel rather looks for the few who will tip the balance in a tightly knit friendship and an unshakable alliance exploiting every leverage point in the social fabric. Rebels advance this new truth to a core group that is self-evident, and therefore quickly grasped by others, leading to action on the ground without any resistance. How could someone be against a paper that is made from mining waste, or marble cut-offs, that have accumulated over centuries and transform this with a minute amount of polymer into a paper for print and packaging that is recyclable forever. Unless, someone works for the paper and pulp industry and obviously sees the demise of a career and a business that was thought to be a safe heaven in a flash, it is hard to be against this logic.
 
How can you be against the farming of mushrooms on coffee, the moment we realize that we only value 0.2% of the biomass? How can you be against paying farmers 10% of the retail price for his produce when everyone else is taking commissions on top of his costs without any consideration for the survival of his family, the rural life, and the Earth? The disarming promise of freeing up millions of hectares of land for natural forests and food while cleaning up air, water and soil, and ensuring that those who work at the bottom of our value chain have a life worth living is too compelling. This is the power of the rebel: making the impossible seems so simple.
 
A Rebel is different from a Revolutionary
 
The rebel is always driven by the common good, an intuition that there is much better. Rebels do not fight the bad; that is the role of Robin Hood and Interpol. Rather rebels fight for the opportunities that no one sees. He or she is a positive whistleblower. Of course, a rebel is an altruist, since any rebel that has a strong ego, wishing to put the self in the center is a revolutionary. This distinction is light for the outsider but decisive for those who act on the ground and make things happen. A rebel is not in search of power, rather in search of massive and positive change, empowering the landless, inspiring the moody, enjoying each moment when small steps are taken in the right direction. A revolutionary wants total control - one day and keeps control of his troops whereas a rebel believes that a job well done is the job where one is not needed, quickly providing the space and time to embark on the next intervention that could be tiny and insignificant for those who do not grasp the full picture, but strategic and homeopathic for those who connect the dots between - at first sight - totally unrelated phenomena.
 
Rebels never create Waves - they Surf
 
The rebel navigates the web of life, knowing where the energy is strongest, and the resilience is greatest, only pushing the points where power is released and leverage can be obtained. The rebel understands the power of feedback loops and multipliers, where with little effort, grand shifts can be obtained. Steve Jobs worked tirelessly to iron out what seemed idiotic details to his entourage, but now that Apple has lost its rebel, loyalists since the beginning sense the difference and sense this love of unconditional strive, and yet once the product is out, it is self-evident. Che Guevara was a revolutionary, impatient with a firm believe in the power of arms, incapable to engage with the grassroots of the Bolivian rural communities. He was paid with a bullet in the head, while exhausted from a fight against the unknown enemy and his asthma attacks.
 
Rebels operate with the existing forces, never trying to be the wave as a revolutionary would attempt exerting an extraordinary (personal) effort, rather rebels ride the waves that shape society permitting a swift move across without ever making a special effort. The answer and the call for action is always just around the corner, any corner. Once a rebel always a rebel, but always bathing in a new light, able to transform and transcend the present, re-emerging and reincarnating as a master who is prepared to learn from students. The leadership of a rebel is therefore one that ensures that new leadership quickly emerges and space is not preserved for the one, rather it is vacated so that the future is secured. After all rebels are not appointed, nor elected, they put themselves in charge.
 
Rebels at home among Peasants and Royals
 
The rebel knows how to navigate in different worlds, from hard work with the peasants ensuring food, managing the creation of top soil and the flow of water, to dining with the royals, able to enjoy family and friends, while finding extended periods of solitude to nourish the mission which no one entrusted. Rebels thrive on clear ethics at the core, rejecting the double moral that characterizes society that is considers less bad … as good. To pursue this lifelong mission of a rebel in heart, soul and action, there are only two simple rules: first that there are no rules, and second that rebels never accept a no for a no … and are still able to smile even when it hurts.
 
In the end it is all about Responsibility
 
When I look at the 40 years of professional life, then I certainly have been a rebel, caused pain and discomfort which I regret while opening the minds of many who now believe they can do better their parents and they themselves ever believed. Now that the University of Pennsylvania ranked our creative network as one of the most innovative think tanks in the world it is clear that this rebellious diplomat failed in the foreign service but now has to accept the responsibility that comes along with recognition at a ripe age: Inspire the next generation to be even more rebellious.

The shift towards renewable energy is facing four major impediments turn the present energy mix into a strategy for sustainable and competitive economic development. The blocks are:
 

1. The incomplete calculation of the real economic cost and impact of the substitution of fossil fuel for renewable energy. No one seems to grasp the multiplier effect caused by an increased amount of money spent in the local economy.
2. The misrepresentation of the fossil fuel industry that sells shale gas as a natural gas, and only presents its ton per ton performance in CO₂ emissions, without taking into account its massive methane leaching at source
3. ​The need to shift the production and consumption model towards dramatically higher resource efficiency as exemplified by the 500 times improvement of the coffee industry; and,  
4. The mindset of the MBA whose focus on core business, based on a core competence only has a license to think in cutting costs at all costs.

Once we understand these factors then we quickly realize that to achieve a world without fossil fuels, more is needed than new technologies or government regulations. We need to imagine pathways out of these traps to ensure that fossil fuels are indeed part of history. As we describe these in the article below, we turn increasingly motivated to design solutions that could have an immediate effect.
 
While the purpose of this article is not to design a menu with solutions, it does aim to outline clearly what is possible provided we have an entrepreneurial approach and take a high degree of freedom: the liberty to imagine business solutions without having any previous experience, being hampered by any of the technological-institutional lock-ins that characterize our modern day society, and the clarity that money is not a limiting factor.

Are you building white elephants?​

When Javier Morales, then the deputy mayor of the island El Hierro, part of the Canary Islands Region of Spain asked me to support the design of a local economy that one  day will be independent in water and fuel, it did not take long to propose a strategy based on wind energy, hydro-power and flywheels.

The goal was not just energy: the goal was to stimulate the local economy, building on tradition and the ecosystem. Instead of viewing enewable energy and abundant water as an objective on its own, these two key inputs to live and development on the island were to stimulate  agriculture and local industries. The total investment for this project at the outset in 1997 was estimated at €67 million. The response from the political and financial world was that if this little island of no more than 10,000 inhabitants would require an investment of so much money to achieve self-sufficiency, then we were invest in a very risky project that is likely to fail and turn into a "white elephant". We often neglect how entrenched our thinking is! Let us look at the same logic from another angle.
 
The island spent at the time €8 million a year on the importation of diesel fuel to generate electric power. Oil tankers cannot avoid spilling oil, and even though this is rather the exception that the rule, the risk remains high. The diesel power installation was noisy and polluting leaving a cloud of black air on the East side of the island. Interestingly, this economic economic   and   energy   model   is considered normal and without risk. However, it does not take an economist to realize that the total expense by the local population for importing fuel, while assuming major risks and contributing to climate change, over a decade amounts to a drainage from the economy of €80 million. This one decade of expenses is enough to fund the capital investment required to warrant four decades of energy independence. In the 1990's, that money went straight to oil producers - none of which are based in Spain. So, we raised the question: "How can the import of polluting fossil fuels be considered normal, while the redirection of a guaranteed expense by everyone on the island into local renewable sources of energy that plough money back into the economy is considered a white elephant?"
 
The idea to convert El Hierro into the first water and fuel self-sufficient island turned into  a  reality  at a total cost of €86 million. The additional €21 million in capital investments were imposed after a volcano eruption forced the construction of additional infrastructure reinforcements. The facility was inaugurated in 2013! The net cash influx into the local economy over the forty years that represent the economic life time of the renewable water and power system is a surprising €680 million. After paying for the installation over a decade (€80 million), the installation saves €8 million per year for 30 years or €240 million. Then the water  and power company pays dividends to the Cabildo, the local government in the order of €3 million per year, or €120 million over the life time. This adds up to a surprising €360 million that is added to the local economy over 40 years, compared to an outflow of €320 million for fuel only, making abstraction of the capital equipment required for the diesel generators. This is an amazing "delta of €680 million", a fortune for a small island. We believed that the island controls its own future. Who is to claim that the numbers are wrong, give or take one hundred million?
 
Now, inspired by this successful transformation of the local economy based on renewables and sustainable water production, the islanders are decided to embark on the next step: all 6,000 vehicles must be electric within a decade. It is surprising that even after the successful implementation of the renewable grid, opponents formulate the same "white elephant" arguments. How can an island afford to spend €150 million in the conversion of a car fleet from fossil fuel to electric and invest in additional renewable power generation? Why would the island ever fund an expansion of the renewable energy system only to serve the automobile fleet? Again we formulated the same question as a response: "How can an island permit the annual expense of €12 million for the purchase of fuel and diesel to power vehicles on the island?" All this money is channeled outside the economy. And, what would it mean if the €8 million for power and the €12 million for fuel were staying and circulating in the territory?
 
The island of El Hierro wishes to create its own electric car leasing company. All taxis and rental cars will be electric with immediate effect, and when there are 500 electric vehicles on the island, then the car leasing company will initiate the installation of a smart grid which stabilizes the network delivering micro-currents when demand so requires, and stores excess energy in car batteries as surpluses become available. When there are 2,500 vehicles, the combination of wind, hydro, flywheels and car batteries will offer a level of efficiency that further drives the cost of water and power down. Water is life and for centuries this island has suffered from a dramatic shortage of both. Just imagine the turnaround thanks to renewables and a smart grid complemented by zero emissions mobility: double the amount of water on the island at half the cost.

​We all too often forget that energy is a medium, not a purpose. Our lives depend on water, food, housing, health, mobility and each one of these core activities of life require power. It is therefore important to shift from a debate on "renewables or not", or worse "for or against fossil fuels", to a debate about our capacity to respond to the basic needs of everyone in our society. If we are prepared to transform our intentions to one that is focused on meeting needs with available resources, then indeed the debate of fossil fuel quickly shifts to a constructive dialogue about the future of communities, and how to finance this transition with available financial, human and natural resources.
 
Time has come to go beyond the "for or against". This divisive approach to life where we pitch the good versus the bad forces people in society to take positions. We cannot neglect the fact that the convenience of fossil fuels and its abundance for decades has permitted too many to live in air conditioned atmospheres, unaware of the unintended consequences caused by the excessive incineration of coal, petroleum and natural gas. We need to lift the debate towards one that discovers the tremendous opportunities to create a thriving local economy using what is locally available. It is a shift from cheap and easy fuel, that permits us to cut costs with an inconvenient truth, towards local energy sources that permit us to grow a sustainable economy of the territory with readily available resources.

​Unaware of the Connections 
​
Fossil fuel has hooked us on the habit of free spending on energy without any consideration of the amount of money that is drained from the local economy. When a small island can pump hundreds of millions into the local economy over one generation of 10,000 inhabitants, imagine what can be done if larger communities emulate this model, or when hundreds of island embark on the same direction. The fuel-based economy would loose its appeal in no time. The key to understand the success of this logic is that the actual cost of oil does not matter, it is the injection of cash into the local economy exploiting local resources and growing the local economy that makes a tremendous and yet overlooked difference.
 
Economists merely notice the impact on the balance of payment of a nation but seldom realize the profound leakage this addiction to oil causes. Importing hundreds of millions of oil imposes the need to generate export revenues to pay the oil import bill. A country like Argentina produces enough food for 400 million people in the world, or ten times more than its  own population requires. However, the country has 750,000 children under 18 malnourished. How do you explain this blind focus on export growth, increased output and the neglect of food and nutrition at home? Argentina's drive towards food exports exacerbated energy consumption and at a rate of 100,000 barrels per day ($4 million per day, or $1.5 billion per year) it is responsible for the trade deficit even when petroleum prices are at an all time low.
 
Fossil fuel is like a drug, it blinds us of its impact and its consequences. Even if we know - we do not want to know. Social scientists realize that there is a dangerous new species populating the Earth: one that refuses to recognizes hard facts. One of the well documented unintended side effects of burning fuel are emissions, not just carbon but also nitrogen and sulfur oxides, popularly known as SOx and NOx, which not only contribute to climate change but also affect the health of every breathing species on earth. We needed a scandal of the magnitude of Volkswagen to realize that the maximum levels of pollution set by European and Californian authorities to safeguard the respiratory health of children were openly defied by the industry, up to the point that car executives of the leading German maker installed deceiving software cheating the public at large, and with impunity. First companies that bent the rules were considered

to large to fail, and were rescued. Now companies that openly deceive and cheat are classified as too large to jail, and are merely offered an exit paying billions of dollars in fines. While we are slowly awaking to the collateral damage created by these emissions we have no idea how we have unraveled the web of life on Earth from a permanent and diligent cycle of carbon sequestration and storage, to one that permanently emits carbon all the time. Let us take the example of silk.
 
A Fine Threat of Silk 

A century ago, the world production of silk hovered around one million tons per year. Today output hardly reaches the 100,000 tons level. The arrival of Nylon, this synthetic polymer developed by scientists at Dupont de Nemours led to the knock-out for this natural polymer produced by the mulberry caterpillar (which the English mistakenly call a worm). The traditional ecological economists would enter the debate and calculate the amount of carbon emitted by one million tons of petroleum used to produce Nylon, and compare this with the carbon sequestered in the process of producing silk. While this is a correct approach it is largely incomplete.

When the Chinese embraced silk farming 5,000 years ago, their first interest was not the silk, rather the conversion of savannas into fertile areas. Indeed, it was quickly noted that the symbiosis of a caterpillar that would devour about 50% of the canopy of the mulberry tree left on the soil a rich mix of excrement so nutritious to micro-organisms that it triggered the creation of a healthy top soil. Within a decade, an area considered infertile, planted with mulberry trees would be ready for farming water melons. What few people realized is that the caterpillars triggered a soft and unnoticed chemistry that fixes carbon massively into the soil, creating a black earth that would continue to serve humanity for centuries. This ecosystem service was the game changer of the mulberry/caterpillar symbiosis. Silk was only a by-product.
 
Now, with the arrival of Nylon, we are not only substituting a natural silk with petroleum derivatives at high energy expense. Much worse, we are depriving the creation of top soil and the sequestration of organically bound carbon and nitrogen. The lack of a continuous cycles of top soil generation with a blend of minerals and nutrients through the creation of additional "ecosystem services" leads to the mining of carbon and nitrogen from the top soil up to a point that there is none left. As soon as carbon is less than 5 or 6%, then the farmer is obliged to "technify" his operations including irrigation and chemicals to maintain production. Irrigation is needed since carbon poor soil cannot retain water.

The loss  of N-P-K (nitrogen, phosphor and potassium) and micro-nutrients force farmers to add synthetic fertilizers since the core composition (carbon) that secures thriving micro- organisms and a diverse ecosystem is too depleted. Of course water and nutrients are only available with the infusion of massive amounts of fossil fuels.
 
Silk is natural and resistant, and has a useful life of at least three generations or one hundred years. Traditional kimonos, the elegant dress for ladies in Japan, would last for hundreds of years. Nylon is a typical throw away product symbolized by ladies' stockings which are sent to the bin the day a minor damage is visible. Nylon is not recycled. So not only is the silk web of life a continuous cycling of carbon, the product itself stores carbon over decades. Nylon not only releases carbon in its manufacturing, the fibers themselves capture carbon during a useful life that spans at best weeks, and more often not more than a few days.
 
Once we realize that the petroleum-chemistry is not only about substituting a natural fiber (silk) with a synthetic one (Nylon), it is about substituting a system that cycled carbon with long retention times and storage systems, into one that leads to the permanent spewing of carbon into the atmosphere due to this throw-away culture, then we realize how difficult it is to put a cap on carbon emissions, unless we change our consumption patterns. This makes our addiction to petroleum even more debilitating. It is like a drug addict who is not only endangering his or her own life, but destroying the whole social tissue around the community by promoting illegal production and trade that enriches a few and leaves society with all costs for rehabilitation, violence, and the penitentiary services.

Reverse the System
 
The key question is how to reverse this trend? We cannot go back in time and suggest that silk has to pick up its past glory as a fashion for the wealthy. It is difficult to imagine the substitution of Nylon by silk. However once we take the time to study the real opportunities embedded in the chemistry of silk, then we realize that there is an exceptional product portfolio at our doorstep that could not only serve humanity, but that could also revive the silk farming, even beyond the levels of production practiced a century ago. The new fields include medical and cosmetic applications.

​As Prof. Dr. Fritz Vollrath has demonstrated through decades of fundamental research predominantly at the Department of Zoology, Oxford University, silk has unique tensile strength, permits cells to grow on and in it, and is a natural inhibitor against the growth of fungus and specific bacteria. Actually, we have forgotten that silk protects a cocoon with a caterpillar inside against the tiniest predators around and has done so very successfully for millions of years. This natural design at the molecular level has been studied in great detail. Now an amazing reality unfolds before our eyes: silk can regenerate cartilage and thus avoids knee replacement based on titanium; silk provides the scaffolding for the regeneration of nerves after trauma including the potential to one day make quadriplegics walk again.
 
While this application will spur the demand for only small volumes of silk, the big market will be in cosmetics where synthetic emulsifiers have become the standard, causing marine pollution with micro-beats that have a great risk of ending up in our food chain. Everything from shaving foam for men to emulsifiers in night creams to reduce wrinkles can now be substituted with a natural alternative. The non-degradable plastics beads can be replaced by silk (and other natural polymers), and that would - conservatively - require the cultivation of 2 million tons of raw silk. We can now roll-out a strategy to operate a 20-fold of acreage for silk farms around the world, with a value added that outstrips the price commanded by luxury good maker Hermès. We are pointing to a demand potential that requires to double the output from the level of silk when it was at its peak production.

​We have to realize that while our addiction to petroleum is causing havoc to the atmosphere and stresses Nature's capacity to perform ecosystem services, the reverse is also true. Wherever there is bad news, we can find very good news. With other words, if the medical and cosmetics industry - realizing the documented challenges that it is facing today were to revert to silk as an option, then we will have to embark on the same massive scale of tree planting that the Chinese, the Turkish and the Italian societies had embarked on throughout history. In those days it was to please the rich and wealthy with the finest clothing. This represents an exceptional opportunity to design better quality products at competitive costs while offering a chance to increase soil fertility and offer a response to the urgent need to have sustainable agriculture with a wealth of nutrition in the soil. It is an economic model that makes sense.
 
Once we realize that renewables are not white elephants and that natural system are capable of strengthening "The Commons" to provide us all ecosystem services, then we have to face the challenging task to overcome the desire of a silent majority to continuously search from more of the same. As Lester Brown, founder of the Worldwatch Institute stated: "the end of the stone age was not a lack of stones; the end of the petroleum age may well not be a shortage of petroleum." However we are stuck with a tremendous institutional-technological lock-in. While silk may create inroads in niche markets that make impact, the tenacity of the petroleum and gas industry to do more of the same is a proof of insensitivity to the reality of climate change, and its damaging effects on life on earth.
 
Silent Chemical Reactions

The battle for a healthy and sustainable world is not fought out through hard political battles in national parliaments or international conventions, it is turned into a reality through silent chemical reactions and predictable physical effects. The molecular structure of a few gases like carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide and methane trap heat in the atmosphere. So the more these simple yet stable molecules cover the Earth, the more heat is prevented from radiating out. This is basic physics. We have seen that all attempts to reduce carbon have made insufficient impact to date. We need go beyond the substitution of Nylon with silk, rather change farming, processing and uses. The drama now is that in the light of dwindling reserves of petroleum that are cheap to exploit (deep seas and extreme climate conditions), attention has diverted to natural gas which is considered cheap and abundant with at least one trillion cubic feet of reserves. That is enough fuel to supply the world for decades to come.
 
The promise of cheap energy in abundance is supposed to fuel the economy. Even President Obama was tricked into believing that the private sector would invest an additional $100 billion in factories that are attracted by low cost and less polluting natural gas. This magic would create - the White House believed - not less than 600,000 new manufacturing jobs. This sugar sweet perspective made the President promise to cut red tape to facilitate the transformation of the energy mix from coal to gas. The promise was hard to refuse, even by the environmentalists. Carl Pope, the long-serving director of the Sierra Club, after receiving a $25 million donation, was prepared to promote natural gas, even from doubtful sources such as fracking. Robert Kennedy Jr., one of the icons of environmental stewardship stated in 2009 that the "energy revolution over the past two years has left America awash in natural gas and has made it possible to eliminate most of our dependence on deadly, destructive coal practically overnight".

Bill McKibben correctly points out in his article in The Nation (March 2016) that the substitution of coal with natural gas is like shifting your diet from a high fat to a reduced fat. Have people not realized that after years of excesses we should not be having fat? Should we not be reducing carbon emissions and then feel a sense of pride since natural gas only emits half of the carbon compared to coal? The bad news is that we cannot only compare coal with natural gas on a ton per ton basis incinerated to produce power, we have to look at the whole system. When the statistics emerged that gas fields are leaking methane (which is officially 21 times worse in trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide even when scientists claim it is rather like 100 times), then it became clear that even a minor escape of 3% would simply double the heat generating effect in the atmosphere. Unfortunately, with all the computing power in the world, science and industry are ill-equipped to sense, take stock and calculate the impact of a whole system of energy consumption. So the proposed shift to natural gas is not that convincing, on the contrary it is confusing, and more likely just more of the same. Even Robert Kennedy Jr. changed by 2013 his mind when he was faced with the hard realities and retracted his earlier endorsement.

​A Completely New Game

Now enters the world of fracking. The process is well known: the injection of chemicals and steam under high pressure to release oil. Unfortunately, it has side-effects. The use of the word "side-effect" or unintended consequences is pejorative since the damage is well documented. However, there is not only a high level of sensitivity to the exploitation of this abundant and cheap energy, there is a remarkable scientific rigor imposed on anyone who claims anything negative about fracking. Whatever is being documented and analyzed is quickly dismissed through critique that advances that the study has flaws, is insufficiently documented, or discovered nothing more than a correlation without a proof of cause and effect. It is remarkable that industry wants to have an immediate permitting without any real due diligence for investments in shale gas operations, and a rapid deployment of capital as to enjoy positive cash flow, however all without restraints. Getting started needs no in depth proof that the process is benign, any critique will have to be substantiated with decades of research and data mining across the globe.
 
Few policy makers who negotiated in Paris realize the vast difference between methane and carbon emissions. Carbonic gases are stable and stay in the atmosphere for centuries. That is the bad news. The good news is that these molecules trap a moderate amount of heat. Methane is a rather unstable molecule and degrades in decades. That is the good news. The very bad news is that the amount of methane pumped into the atmosphere is rapidly increasing since natural gas is the wave of the day. This process accelerates the locking up of heat in the atmosphere. This causes rapid melting of ice caps, acidification of the seas, and rising sea levels. Introducing fracking as the main new component in the energy mix has a double sided effect: (1) the energy industry is closing coal mines; but, (2) it is opening methane geysers. This means that the oil and gas industry is riding the wave of more of the same, while the public and even the policy makers believe there is a tangible improvement towards a lower carbon energy mix. Sometimes we should ask ourselves why we are so easily fooled?
 
Statics based on satellite pictures demonstrate that natural gas in general but shale gas in particular (which is also sold under the label of natural gas) extracted in the United States is responsible for at least 30% of the increase in methane gas emissions around the world. In addition, fracking causes earthquakes as Josh Sandburn reported in March 2016 in Time Magazine. In 2007 the State of Oklahoma reported one earthquake with the power 3 on the Richter scale. In 2015 there were nearly one thousand earthquakes. The center state of fracking in the USA now has more earthquakes than California which lays on a known fault line. This phenomenon of earthquakes is nothing new. Groningen, the center of natural gas extraction in the Netherlands had no earthquakes before 1986, and now suffers from an average of fifty per year.
 
The power of these findings is that we know the source of the problem and we know what to do. Some of us would expect the political leadership of the United States, especially under a Democrat Party presidency, which pretends to be akin to measures to reduce  carbon  emissions,  is  to  warn other nations not to follow the same route as the American oil and gas industry is proposing. WikiLeaks cables sent by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton demonstrate that the American government was (is) doing the contrary: she was actively promoting fracking.

Mrs. Clinton successfully arm twisted the government of Bulgaria to sign a deal with Chevron in 2011 but relentless protests forced the government to ban fracking in 2012. The same happened in Romania, but there the protests were squashed by police and the Government decided to proceed with the Chevron deal supported by the US Government after the mayor of the town purchased a large area from his own city in order to hand it over to Chevron. Fortunately, France banned it, while Germany has de-facto banned even though this energy extraction process has been practiced in the country since 1975. While a few countries ban fracking, the largest leaks of methane that have already  been  created  cannot  be plugged.

Traditionally the industry fills shafts with cement, which contracts while drying. This leaving space for gas to dissipate into the atmosphere and there are no known techniques to plug them.
 
There are Options - and we know it

Over the decade that fracking has been practiced broad-scale in North America, the cost price of solar photo-voltaics has dropped 80%. That is good news. However, it is not good enough. We need to go beyond the mere substitution of one source of energy for another. The third reality we have to face is that we will only create a fossil free world if we change our system of production and consumption. The mere substitution of one source of energy  with another will not steer societies towards a fossil free world, what is needed is a dramatic improvement of resource productivity: use what we have and do more with what nature produces and has stored, instead of forcing nature to produce ever more.
 
The case of coffee is one of these obvious examples that surprises many, and demonstrates once more how much more ignorant we are of the opportunities before us than of the damage we cause. Coffee is a globally traded commodity. An estimated 10 million tons of green coffee travels the world. Who is aware that only 20,000 tons are actually ingested, and a staggering 9,980,000 tons is discarded as waste. At best, this left-over from the coffee brewing process is composted, even though we know that between the moment of brewing and the moment of disposal there is already a generation of (once more) methane gas.
 
Shale gas and coffee are not that different. We all know that agriculture causes major methane emissions. But, what we do not know is that many of these emissions could easily have been avoided. The coffee processing industry, from the makers of instant coffee to the chains of coffee shops all have found their ecological solutions that unfortunately belong to the same category of "substituting high fat with regular fat", whereas we know we cannot have fat.​

The preferred solution of the coffee processing industry is burn its waste. While the incineration of coffee grounds, like so many other forms of agricultural residues, is often presented as an effort to reduce dependency on fossil fuels, we forget that the generation of methane gas and carbon emissions is not the most important missed opportunity. The whole supply chain could benefit from a fresh approach, since the substitution of fossil fuel with coffee left-overs is doing "less bad". We are in need of this logic that we can and must "do more good". Here goes our logic: coffee is treated either by heat or by inert gases to extract the soluble part that offers either a powder to produce an instant drink, or a hot coffee to enjoy. Since the biomass has been pre-treated it is ideal for farming mushrooms. Do we realize that 60% of the cost of mushroom farming is the sterilization of the substrate - and this energy is not required anymore if we use processed coffee and use the grounds on site? There is a broad portfolio of products that can be derived from a waste stream that is considered only good to be burned. It is a portfolio of opportunities.
 
The case of coffee is just one of the many examples that demonstrates that with a minor shift in handling and processing, we are able to create energy efficiencies that have not been considered viable. We can farm mushrooms with 60% less energy and no need to transport raw materials. The advantage is that most of these solutions do not require new technologies or complex engineering, neither heavy capital investments. These solutions are pragmatic and can be implemented by "you and me". The only way that we will succeed in the creation of a fossil free world is that we cascade matter, nutrition and energy just the way Nature does. It is not difficult, it is different. The book "The Blue Economy 2.0 : an update to the Report to the Club of Rome" offers insights in cases that have been implemented and inspire everyone to do much better than we ever imagined before.

Epilogue: The MBA

The fourth and perhaps the greatest obstacle to achieve a world with renewables only will not be "the oil and gas lobby". The greatest impediment to turn into a green society are the millions of MBA's (masters of business administration) who have been brainwashed to only consider a core business, based on a core competence and focus on cutting costs at all cost. MBA's believe that cheaper is better, and the solution to competitiveness, thus stimulating mergers and acquisitions. As long as we are entrusting our youth to academia who are teaching the next generation of managers that more and cheaper of the same is the model forward for society then we will never have communities that will be capable of steering towards sustainability as El Hierro has done. However, when we are prepared to embrace business as Nature does, with respect for The Commons, all invisible interconnections, unseen feedback loops, multipliers and clear ethics including nothing is wasted and everyone contributes to the best of their abilities, then we will have no difficulties to achieve a fossil fuel free society.

For more information:
​
Please Visit www.TheBlueEconomy.org and www.zeri.org or
Write us to: info@theblueeconomy.org or info@zeri.org

At the start of this year I reflect on the history of the arrival of humankind on Earth some 4 million years ago. The story unfolds in an amazing way since 99% of our history is reconstructed with approximately 1,000 fragments of skulls and skeletons of humanoids gathered from around the world. Scientific research on these few bones permits scholars to draw up hypotheses and put forward interpretations which plausibly reconstruct the emergence of our bipedal species spanning millions of years.
 
Then, after millions of years covered by well-informed guessing, finally less than 100,000 years ago the first writing is on the wall when the first written documents emerged. These painted messages, fragments of rock carvings or tablets provide a first hand glimpse of the development of humanity based on writings by humanity. It is interesting that in this whole study we only see evolution upwards: humanity is the crown of these millions of years of development. We study the arrival and the expansion of human presence as if after us nothing of importance is going to happen.
 
From the day that we observe how humans started to walk on two feet we believe that we had lifted ourselves from primitive life, and that we are engaged in a perpetual war for survival. We are convinced that only after Konrad Lorenz, the Austrian Nobel Laureate in Medicine, who studied birds and animals gathered a very pessimistic view of man's nature. He saw an aggressive species that battles for territory, wages war and creates a lot of suffering  for  his  fellow  humans  as  well  as most species in Nature. Therefore, Lorenz believed that Man was destined to be checked, controlled and balanced by a rigorous system that could be called culture  or  government.  It  seems  that  the role  of Government, responsible for approximately 50% of the world economy, and the millions of laws that regulate daily life around the globe has confirmed his analysis.
 
Man, as an individual, and organized through Government or even Religion and under a rigorous control can do incredible evil. The genocides systematically pursued by colonizers against local tribes in Namibia and the Congo, by the Nazis against members of the Jewish Faith, or by rival racial tribes in Rwanda demonstrate unfortunately that even governments need international powers to secure a check and control like the United Nations and its organizations like its Peacekeeping force. Humans need time to evolve into a humane species.
 
The characteristics of the human species were confirmed over millions of years.  One  of  these qualities  is  a  unique  flexibility  to  adapt  to  new environments. Humans have transformed throughout evolution thanks to this innate capability to evolve over a few generations into something that could not be imagine at the outset. Humankind has this desire to go beyond known frontiers, as the emigration from Africa to every corner of the world in the span of 40 to 50,000 years has demonstrated.  Humans  have  this  capacity to determine a pathway and persevere, as the construction of the cathedrals throughout Europe demonstrated. All those involved in the decision to build knew at the outset of this huge undertaking that they would never get a glimpse of the final result, and yet they decided to commit up to 15% of all revenues of the city for over a hundred years to see this through.
 
Unfortunately, it seems that in recent times humans have lost that flexibility and this process of grasping what we are doing has become more difficult than ever before. With a wealth of facts before us, describing, documenting and proving the devastation we are causing and the unsustainability of our way of living, we seem incapable to evolve our behavior to a better one. We hide behind the complexity of life, even when we used to navigate it with great certainty.

We observe  this massive man-driven  extinction of species, a pervasive negligence and inaction around the emission of greenhouse gases and climate change, the over-consumption of resources. Our consumption goes way beyond the means of our planet. The destructive pollution of modern civilization, combined with a dominant focus on the individual by that same individual renders humanity increasingly unable to adapt to the new conditions it has created.
 
There is nothing more rewarding in life than seeing and understanding what we did and where we are doing, what unintended effects we cause and - perhaps most important - to realize that we have been ignorant about our impact, or mis-oriented when we pursued selfish interests such as the blind accumulation of cash. This renewed understanding allows us to evolve, to adapt, and to do better. The concept of the paradigm shift as propagated by some is healthy and exciting, but only for a minute part of the world's population. The large majority aspires to emulate a lifestyle that leads to collapse.

That is why I would like to explore again the origins of how humans turned humane, and hope that we recover what we seem to have lost. Did Humanity expel itself from this Garden of Eden? If so, then we have the capacity to recreate it as well.

It Started in Africa

The main line of thought until the late 19th   century was that humanity emerged from Asia. Charles Darwin was the first to point to our close relation with chimpanzees and gorillas. The association of humans with primates was why he concluded that our origins were to be found in the tropical parts of Africa. Only one hundred years ago no one would have believed it. Now it is generally accepted that we descended from African primates from whom we diverged approximately seven million years ago.

There is a geophysical reason: while Europe  and Asia  were  subjected  to  the  Ice Age, Africa contained over the span of a few million years up to 90% of habitable land. Therefore the first communities could only live comfortably in Africa, move from the center of the Continent to the sea, where humans discovered the riches of life. Five million years ago, Africa started to dry out and the great forests where the primates thrived shrank. This forced our ancestors to adapt to new living conditions that drove them to search for new settlements. In the process of this search, the first stone technology emerged approximately 2.5 million years ago and the use of fire one million years ago.

We learned to walk on two feet well before our brains grew in size. The greatest innovation of all times was perhaps the invention of the bag. The bag permitted the hunter gatherer to carry 15 times more food than he would ever need himself to survive the day. The bag helps to create a home base, to divide labor, to share food, and to guarantee supply over a longer period of time. In addition, the invention of the bag simplified life of a mother who can haul an infant while gathering food. The bag made us human and helped us create community since now no one consumes on their own, and all what is carried is to be shared. The bag started the sharing economy.

The experience to come home with a bag full of food triggered in the human brain an "emotional sandwich". One one side there is stress caused by the high risk taken to walk on two legs, instead of four. Two legs move slower and less stable than four, but frees the hands. A control over hands combined with this innovative pouch allowed the transport of nutrition over distance. The other side of the brain is the emotional reward for the risk: a warm welcome by a family eagerly awaiting the arrival of food, and the emerging of a caring community based on a pattern of food security.

Community based on Empathy

This emotional experience of risk and reward led to a community based on empathy. This triggered perhaps one of the most critical moments in our development as a human. First, this provided a strong impulse to our emotional part of the brain and started a long process of development of different parts of our central nervous system. The artistic expression found a permanent and deep space in our emerging brain. Second, this helped to stabilize settlements, humans started to sing and dance well before anyone could speak, food and water remained available over all seasons. Humans differentiated from primates by learning the value of community, and the importance of caring, especially for offsprings. When humans stopped the senseless murder of infants by the alpha males simply because these children were not his - this new family of living species started to behave humane.
 
About 300,000 years ago a second desertification affected human  life styles in Africa more profoundly than before. Communities of early humans were forced south and west to be stopped by the Atlantic and the Indian Ocean. Here these new settlements lived on a rich diet of crustacea and fish, largely unknown. This new plate of nutrition fueled the physical growth of the human in general and the brain in particular. The greatest and most detailed discoveries to document these insights of early humankind were made in Southern Africa.

Humans possess innate possibilities and are the product of Nature and nurture.  Humans  are  not pre-programmed  machines.  While  we  share 98.8% of our DNA sequence with primates, this does not mean that a minor difference in DNA makes us similar. Humans share 35% of genes with daffodils,  and  that  does  not  make  us  one  third daffodil. One of the major difference is speech, and the capacity to hear and understand language. But before we evolved the capacity to talk and listen, we already acquired the capacity for empathy millions of years before when our ancestors split from the primates. We learned to walk, care for each other, and created a culture of song and dance to strengthen empathy. The humans that emerged from this evolution lost the alpha male as the dominant figure in their community.

The Alpha Male and Monogamy

When we project man and society against its African primate origins, we quickly borrow the alpha male from the animal world to describe the importance and the dominance of the human male. However, it is not because we are closely related to primates that we behave like the alpha male, even though this particular role has been well publicized and received broad scientific attention.

The alpha male is part of the world of chimpanzees. He is aggressive, carnivorous, makes war and even turns into a cannibal. Chimpanzees eat fruits and therefore have to cover vast areas to find food all year around. The gorilla, also known for the male dominance, is sociable and a vegetarian. He mainly devours leaves that are within reach in a small area, limiting the need to travel, promoting the organization of small groups in tree branches. The bonobo on the other hand is peaceful, solves conflicts, has the same diet as the chimp, but has a completely different social organization in which females form coalitions to dominate males. Finally, there is the orangutan which lives like a recluse most of his life.
 
Scientific research points out that we share 99% of feelings and emotions with the chimps, ranging from jealousy, thirst for power, sexual attraction, fear, aggression. This is something we clearly do not share with fish. We also have a common moral system made out of punishment, reciprocity, distribution  of  food,  reconciliation,  empathy  and  sympathy,  concern  of welfare for the group. Still, there are fundamental differences and one is monogamy. Evolution has provided us with an instinct for faithfulness. When we switched from vegetables and fruits to meat, children needed a reliable and stable relationship between the hunter and the mother to improve survival.
 
The frequent walks upright to carry more food required an extremely extensive anatomical specialization  which  separates  us  from  all  other primates. To turn human, evolution had to reconstruct spine, thigh, knee and foot. No other mammal has undergone such an anatomical adaptation, except perhaps the whale that first roamed  land  as  a  dog-like  animal,  and then returned to the sea. The new anatomy improved the capacity to carry more food, made gathering more efficient, reduced the overall risk of speed and instability, and left the couple with much more time to be devoted to family and the community. This led to an increased sense of solidarity and hence a greater chance of survival. Mindfulness emerged as a core characteristic of human nature.
 
Another major difference between primates and the emerging human race is that young females started to leave their group reaching reproductive age looking for a life partner in another settlement. If both females and males were to remain with the original family group, then incest would lead to a degeneration of their offsprings. Evolution taught that young born to females who changed the group were stronger than the offsprings from those that had remained behind. This is the reason that females became endowed with this instinct to search for a partner outside the inner clan. This turned the female into a more flexible and naturally more adaptive being. Since the female could not return to her clan, the unity in the family required a powerful pair-bond which is unusual among mammals. However, this new life style allowed males and females to make a life-long investment in their descendants.
 
The metabolic rate of the brain is 22 times faster than that of major muscles. The brain accounts with the heart, liver, kidney and intestines 70% of the body's energy requirements. This was facilitated by a transformation of the human digestive system that could easily digest animal proteins complementing proteins from plants that made up the bulk of our predecessors' diet. A nursing mother requires the same number of calories per day as a runner preparing for a marathon. Time has come to stabilize relations and to trust each other.

Life Long investments and Reduced Risks

As a more powerful bond developed among our predecessors, ovulation became increasingly concealed. The female could copulate more frequently with the same male, which served to strengthen the bond and increases the probability that this individual is the father of her young. This
made it more profitable in genetic terms for the father to help the female and the young to get food. This in turn diminished the need for mother and child to look for food themselves which reduced risks. This emerging pattern of behavior markedly increased chances of survival. Within this new context, the female will choose a male inclined to help and protect her. She prefers a male with small canines who is dedicated to her and their children over a macho male which huge canines who is always ready to fight, and even kill her offsprings if he would be uncertain it were his as a means to establish and protect his supremacy.
 
Even though it was long believed that tools and language were the privilege of the human species, we have discovered that many animals are endowed with this capacity. The tool of language is not exclusive to humans. We do differentiate  ourselves  with  our  capacity  to  articulate  consonants since many species can only make vowels. Our particularity is further demonstrated with genes that developed our hearing into language processing instruments. Improved insights through hearing, and the shift away from infanticide, stimulated early human society, based on the pair-bond, to consider internal tensions the most threatening. Life, and the very survival of the group depends on life-long cooperation. This cooperation is embedded in a collective memory and a learning process that is created  and  reinforced  through  storytelling,  accompanied  by  song  and dance.

As humans evolved over millions of years triggered by this emotional sandwich, the brain grew from 450cc to the 1,400cc of a modern human. In the process of growing our brain and crane, humans started losing canines. Whereas male primates possess these terrifying weapons to ensure respect and obedience, the humans apparently learned at a very early stage to manage anger and demonstrate dominance in other  ways  than  showing  off  large  teeth, threatening to fight and kill. Humans ultimately ended up with women's teeth!
 
This reduction of aggression and tension resulted in a greater likelihood for the young to survive. 37% of infant death among gorillas is murder by males. The additional benefit of the shift towards female logic is that the emerging homo in peaceful groups could concentrate all efforts to gather food and to protect the community collectively. The importance of cooking and eating together turns into a core characteristic of a human community. Acquiring and preparing food as an individual for oneself leads to an alienation of those individuals in society, undernourishment and early death.
 
Then, humans developed this exceptional capacity to breath at will, thanks to the ability to store a high level of haemoglobin in red blood cells. The control to close air passage at the base of the tongue, while inhaling air made more complex speech possible. Humans learned to communicate with one another like no other mammal has ever achieved. This enhanced the capacity to work together, and reinforces empathy. Humans subsequently learn to imagine how other people think and feel. This endowed us with the desire to do to others as we would be done by: evolution led to solidarity and strengthened our mindfulness.

Efficiency through Solidarity and Sharing

The efficiency of life reached an all time high when sharing became a tool of exchange. The early communities in and around the Kalahari Desert had a widely distributed knowledge amongst all members about food and nutrition. The clan lived on an extremely varied diet of +100 plants, 30 types of fruits, nuts and berries, 18 types of resins. Young women knew at least 300 different plants, how to prepare as food or as cure. One third of the diet is now meat, or approximately 100 kilos per person per year. During his lifetime as a hunter, early man would kill 100 animals. A single kudu of 400 kilos provides 600,000 kilo-calories, enough to feed  a  group  of  30  individuals  for  ten  days,  equivalent  to  50  days  of  gathering. Now the humans are gathering around a fire. This solidified and increased the sense of community.
 
The first humans in the Cape lived in a fynbos, one of the world's richest biotopes in botanical species. Here the humans could substitute the quantity of food with the quality of food, a variety of vegetarian and animal protein, enriched with crustaceans and shellfish. Seafood emerges as a key part of the diet which boosted the functioning of this energy intensive human brain over a short period. Although the brain is only 2% of bodyweight, it accounts for 20% of an adult body's energy. The oldest accurately dated finds of anatomically modern humans are found in conjunction with piles of seashells. This healthy and nutritious diet permitted the human species to develop an advanced sensory capacity. These first Africans carried out impressive works of art 77,000 years ago, twice as old as the oldest cave art in Europe.
 
These clans with fine arts had the ability to conceive the past, present and future. This capacity defines modernity in terms of intellectual capacity. Life in this relatively infertile Southern African environment, required only two to three hours of work to attain food security. This resulted in time for leisure, strengthening solidarity, building a resilient community, caring for the family, strengthening the will to stay together. Modernity emerged by chatting around the evening fire and having fun, being nice to each other, singing, dancing and learning different means to resolve conflicts.
 
The human dependence of the hunter-gatherer group was driven by their ability to share. This provides security over time and minimizes risk- taking with a powerful obligation to help one's neighbors. Social interaction was key, visitors were always welcome and extended contacts outside the nucleus of the group diminished the risk of inbreeding within the group.
 
Ownership and possession of the hunter-gatherer were very restricted in the course of his lifetime to approximately 10 kilos. That is all that could be easily carried when there was a need to move to a new camp. Life and culture of the hunter gatherer emerged over tens of thousands of years to minimize  risk  of  violence  within  and  amongst  the  groups.  Those  who managed   best   to   ban  conflict   increased   the   chance  of   surviving  to reproduce and so transfer their cooperative drive to future generations. Agreements were reached not by consensus, where everyone agrees, nor by majority plus one, but by reaching the point that no one had sufficiently strong opposition, leaving it to others to pursue what they considered important.
 
In a world where leadership is authoritative, rather than authoritarian, and where a cooperative spirit enjoys a high cultural status, life is geared towards conflict anxiety. Males and females were even physically comparable in size, which leads to an increased equality between sexes. So the harem gave way to a style of living together out of necessity. Since the brains of the babies were growing larger, meant that the children had to be looked after much longer. In a hunter gatherer society no mother would have succeeded without living together with the father, and the extended family.
 
Caring for each other was the best option in order to pass on the genes to the next generation. Here emerged self-confidence and self-esteem, an evolutionary drive to gain approval of the group and a caring for each other. This combines with a unique biological pecularity in our brain: perseverance, we simply do not give up and keep on trying. This drive for perfection is a unique human trait that is in strong contrast with the rest of the animal world. While we consider this a standard feature, the other primates must consider us mad. Nor would another ape get the preposterous idea of lying down and sleep next to someone one had just intercourse with. In the animal world, only mothers stick close to their babies, no one else.
 
While food from seas, lakes and rivers provided the energy, humans also developed language, which brought powerful tools such as devotion and guilt, creating deeper relationships while formalizing the daily contacts and develop maternal love, the most powerful and fundamental instinct in species. The group starts to provide proof of empathy. We are as human species unique in providing altruistic help to individuals outside our own group, even to strangers. However, empathy is the glue that binds socially complex  communities  together.  We  are  born  with  a  will  to  distinguish between good and bad, to do as we are done by. Our innate moral sense then went on to create religion. This was not only an environment that was good for Nature, it was also good for our souls.

The Exodus

These African communities started to travel and discover the world at a rate of 25 to 30 kilometers per generation. Around 10,000 years ago humans started keeping domestic animals, instead of hunting. We farmed land instead of gathering. This shift changed the way we lived (in one place) and what we ate (milk and cereals we barely consumed before). Our change in diet and our change in social organization made it possible to produce more food per hectare. However we do not seem to be aware that a diet based on large portions of grain and milk provided poorer nutrition then what the human race was accustomed to. The result is that we shrank  in  size  as  we  learned  from the comparison with the Neanderthals that lived in Germany. Not only did we physically shrink in size, even our brain started to contract again.
 
Left skull of modern human being, right skull of Neanderthal. The new agricultural communities provided a controlled, protected environment. The distributed organization of large numbers of people in different parts on Earth meant that humans gained power over the world around that no single animal ever attained. These sedentary communities displayed creative thinking, had the ability to reflect on mistakes and how to improve them with an ability to cooperate with different groups and invent forms of exchange with distant settlements. The networks of communities over large areas provided a form of life assurance in difficult times as help would be within reach at times of setbacks. These settlements built better dwellings and acquired the technologies to recreate the tropical conditions of origin thanks to solid housing, fire and woven clothing. The same technique of weaving produced nets for hunting and fishing approximately 30,000 years ago. Humans invented the needle and could sew clothing. That gave an advantage over any other skin protection.
 
Humans acquired long noses to allow hot air to cool, or cool air the warm up and moisturize it by a larger expanse of the mucus membrane. Tall people have it easier to radiate surplus body heat. Even our looks started to differ since a less frequent exposure to the sun acquired humans a lighter skin color that makes it easier for sunlight to penetrate the epidermis to help synthesize vitamin D which plays a key role in the production of calcium to reinforce the skeleton.
 
The diverse looks that evolved over millennia of migration to all corners of the world do not reflect the fact that genetically all humans are 99.9% alike. There are genetically speaking no races. The lack of genetic diversity among human beings is potentially a major problem. It makes us considerably  more susceptible  than  any  other species to viral and bacterial diseases, and to epidemics. That is why after a clear commitment to resolve conflict, humans accepted the duty to cure illnesses and to strengthen our immune system. The new role of healers emerged. At first, no one gained any special privileges, no matter how skilled one may have been. Healing originally equated to sharing spiritual gifts, and the cure emerged during dances where everyone is engaged in healing and strengthening everyone else, while strengthening solidarity. During these dances, the whole becomes greater than the sum of its parts. Humanity emerged in Africa singing, dancing and painting and it left to discover all continents keeping these traditions solidly in place wherever humans finally settled.
 
Throughout these new times for humanity art and religion assumed the responsibility to create metaphors. Common to all religions is that the lives of humans are ultimately governed and influenced by forces that cannot be analyzed using logic and science. At the same time humanity created a world of artifacts that are pure inventions and never existed before. We invent our world and change it through what we achieve together. No other species has ever achieved that.
 
Thousands year later, the advent of modern science assumed the responsibility to deconstruct metaphors and force a focus on what is real and what can be measured. For the Bushmen in Africa, shamanism and trance, as well as its expression in rock art was a responsibility shared by everyone. However, as populations emigrated to the far corners of the world, the European cave art and religious role of the shaman led to shift from an egalitarian to a hierarchical society. The first hierarchical societies were created where a few had power over many.

Dancing and singing strengthened the group. Language made it easier to resolve conflict, to cooperate, to reach agreement and to keep in touch over time. The idea that there are spirits we cannot see, but who influence our lives emerged as a powerful concept. Suddenly everything can be explained! Why the harvest is abundant, or why I am ill, how the children grow up healthy, and why there is rain when we need it. All subsequent civilizations evolved around the idea that these spirits must be kept happy. The emerging religious rites are performed in combination with rhythmic music that gives a powerful sense of well-being and continued coherence of the group. This becomes a fundamental part of us becoming human. The world that emerged now is fundamentally different from the one humans pursued for eons as hunter gatherers.

The End of the Garden Of Eden

The human settlements served early on as hosts for rites, and this permitted the ceremonial masters to acquire greater influence and thus emerged  the  first  taste  of  power.  The  desire  to  transition  from  hunter gatherer to farmer perhaps had more to do with power than with food. As we learned, a new diet of grains and milk (gluten and lactose which only few could digest) reduced our size and even shrunk our brain by as much as 20%. So 8,000 years ago only a few hundreds of productive farming villages dotted the planet that were fundamentally hierarchical,  organized  power  structures, with populations divided into social classes. After an estimated 2,000 years all humanity lived in this structured way.
 
Of course there was a clear necessity to get down to basics like storage and delivery. As a hunter gatherer, food was available all year following the rhythm of Nature. As a farmer, the entire yield needed to be guarded and consumption had to be carefully spread over the year. The granaries permitted the rise of guards who could demand part of the harvest, without ever having contributed to its production. That was a very new phenomena.
 
The transformation of a food chain of daily fresh supplies to year-long planning stimulated new ways of preparing (baking, boiling, brewing) and preserving food (pickle, sugar, salt). The power of wild yeast to preserve food, add taste, transform and release the unique nutrition embedded in produce and fruits led to the advent of wine, beer, yoghurt, bread, sauerkraut, tofu, kimchi, even coffee and tea, which are all the product of fermentation.
 
Soon walls were erected to protect the harvest and written language improved control and made it easier to exert power over a distance. This promoted more sophisticated arts and crafts and led to one of humanity's greatest revolutions: bureaucracy. Then the new form of life shifted the management  of  procreation.  Nomadic civilization planned birth carefully in line with the carrying capacity of the land they roamed. The farmers perceived their capacity to feed as a freedom to procreate and this lead to a population explosion. However, the advent of agriculture and the strengthening of civilization created an environment that condoned and even promoted ego, selfishness and war.

We  could  conclude  that  this  was  the  end  of  the  first  affluent  society.  Humans had evicted themselves from the Garden of Eden.
 
Life got violent and civilization turned out to be a lot more brutal than earlier phases of human existence. There was a need to defend the grain reserves which led to inventing cavalry and archery. This resulted in a new profession: the soldier who turned out very expensive, compared to the era of the hunter gatherer when every nomad was a warrior. But the waging of war and the cost of armies was not the only side-effect of civilization, the other was the rise of epidemics. The close proximity of animals, and the mutation   of   viruses    unleashed  entirely   new plagues to which the human immune  system had no defenses. The third impact of civilization was the destruction of the environment. A few centuries of irrigation (e.g. Mesopotamia) turned an entire fertile region into wasteland due to the accumulation of salt. Farming caused massive and uncontrolled soil erosion which led to the rise of the river beds which caused extensive flooding (e.g. Yellow River).
 
The advent of agriculture and civilization thus caused social conflict, environmental degradation and human suffering beyond anything experienced by humanity before peeling solidarity, reducing security and increasing risks to life ending the sense of community and belonging. Endless disputes often over trivial issues like access to resources and possessions blown up in importance by ego's that use their power to intimidate and to determine (armed) settlements.
 
This is a new world where The Commons were invaded, and human rights needed protection, since the core principles that had emerged and were embraced by all did not apply anymore. Individuals dominate, accumulate wealth beyond their capacity to consume in a lifetime, and often are prepared to squander everything, including the lives of others to satisfy their ego.
 
What a difference a couple thousand years make.