|
The Groundwork
Narrowly defined, the collection of biological organisms within a given area is called an ecosystem. All biological organisms work to sustain life 24 hours a day: 7 days a week.. Each organism within an ecosystem is symbiotic with other organisms in that ecosystem.
In other words, the work that one organism performs-is dependant on, and beneficial to other organisms within an ecosystem. For example, all green plants produce oxygen, calories and nutrients as a byproduct of their work cycle. However, without the work of pollinators such as bees, birds, fish and frogs-then green plants would not exist. To be sure: green plants would not exist if there were no birds and bees; and birds and bees would not exist without green plants.
Nature's Preeminent Efficiency
The work that ecosystems produce is completely free and beneficial to human beings. That is, leave an ecosystem alone and it will produce air, water, food, clothing and shelter at no cost to us. Clearly: the food, clothing, and shelter can only be utilized if humans put work into the process. But it should be self-evident that the basic ingredients (plants, animals, minerals, etc.) are provided by ecosystems to us at no monetary cost.
Anything that has no cost is completely efficient. In physics, something that is completely efficient is self-perpetuating. For example, push off in space, and (notwithstanding gravity) one would travel forever. Scientists have gone to great lengths to find a self-perpetuating machine: a machine that will produce as much energy (or more) as put in to create that energy. If we could just step back and take a look: we would stop looking for this elusive machine, because it's right outside our door.
Nature is a completely self-sustaining system. There is no more efficient use of resources than to let nature work its process. Simply leave it alone, and it will provide whatever is necessary for life to exist and thrive. Plants will grow, birds will fly, fish will swim, water will flow, and human beings will thrive.
Is nature infallible, however? Are nature's resources unlimited? Mess with its highly tuned process; take away several of the essential components of the symbiotic system; introduce one too many a-biotic elements: and the process will break down. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link.
Anthrop-inefficiency and Anthropocentrism
All biological organisms create waste. Fortunately, the organic waste of one biological organism is a life-sustaining element of another. For example, the organic waste that human beings create is CO2, urine, and fecal matter. This human organic waste is beneficial to other biological organisms: CO2, urine, and feces are plant and fungal food. The organic byproduct of breathing air, eating food, and drinking water is beneficial to other biological organisms that are beneficial to us.
Wherein lays the problem? Inorganic human waste is breaking the symbiotic, self-sustaining cycle of nature. The byproduct of burning coal or oil (NO, SO2, Mercury, and literally hundreds of other chemicals) is not organic. These inorganic byproducts of burning coal or oil are actually life-threatening: not life-sustaining. Simply stand next to a petroleum combustible engine exhaust-pipe long enough and one will quickly resolve any doubts on the matter. (Warning: the previous sentence was used for illustrative purposes only, and it was not an endorsement, nor a call to action, to actually stand in front of a petroleum combustible engine exhaust pipe).
Real and Significant Economic Benefits of Conservation
To calculate the monetary benefits of conserving nature, one would have to calculate the monetary value of each (human-benefiting) contribution for literally millions of organisms: from micro to macro. For example, imagine that we had no green plants, and we had to synthesize oxygen from some other means. How much would it cost to do so? The value of this calculation should be equal to the value that we place on simply letting green plants do their work. If green plants cannot exist without pollinators, then the contribution of pollinators would have to be calculated as well, ad infinitum. Essentially, the value of conserving nature is equal to the value of human life.
Real-World Examples
Too much abstract theoretical hogwash? Examine several examples to view how investing time, money and effort into conserving nature actually produces real-life economic benefits.
By conducting studies and reviewing thousands of articles on the benefits of ecosystems, scientists have overwhelmingly concluded that healthy and diverse ecosystems provide essential services that support life on Earth at little or no cost.
For example, these studies note that:
Wetlands provide services to humanity valued as high as $15 trillion annually, including the water supply on which an estimated 1.5 -3 billion people depend.
An annual investment of U.S. $45 billion in preserving large tracts of wilderness would yield an annual return to society of between $4.4 trillion and $5.2 trillion in "ecosystem services" like water filtration and climate regulation: a 100 to 1 return on investment.
Estimated cost to New York City to buy watershed lands to protect upstate drinking water supplies: $1.5 billion. Estimated cost to New York City to build a filtration plant if upstate watershed lands are developed: $6 billion to $8 billion. Annual reduction in water treatment costs after the city of Gastonia, North Carolina, relocated its drinking water intake to a lake without surrounding development: $250,000.
Annual value of agricultural production in California's Central Valley: $13 billion. Estimated amount of Central Valley farmland lost to urban sprawl each year: 15,000 acres. Estimated value of agricultural production that could be saved by 2040 if Central Valley communities increased the density of development from 3 to 6 housing units per acre: $72 billion.
The number of Denver residents who in 1980 said they would pay more to live near a greenbelt or park: 16 percent. The number who said so in 1990: 48 percent. Estimated gross increase in residential property value resulting from proximity to San Francisco's Golden Gate Park: $500 million to $1 billion.
Estimated value of outdoor recreation to the U.S. economy in 1996: $40 billion. Amount spent on hiking footwear each year: $374 million. Annual economic benefits to local economies of visits to U.S. national parks: $10 billion. Annual revenue of local businesses from visitors to U. S. national wildlife refuges in 1995: $401 million. Income from the 10,000 jobs supported by these visitors: $162.9 million. Annual economic contribution of whitewater rafting on West Virginia's Gauley River: $20 million.
Proportion of tree cover in the total land area of Atlanta, Georgia: 27 percent. Estimated annual value of this tree cover to improving Atlanta's air quality: $15 million. Additional annual economic benefits in air quality that would be realized if Atlanta's tree cover were increased to 40 percent: $7 million.
Amount spent to maintain Maryland's Northern Central Rail Trail in 1993: $191,893. State and local taxes generated by Maryland's Northern Central Rail Trail in 1993: $304,000.
Approximate number of measures on state and local ballots in November 1998 concerning land conservation, parks, and smarter growth: 240. Fraction of those approved by voters: 72 percent.
To download or access these reports online please visit:
"The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment"
-- http://www.millenniumassessment.org
"The Economic Benefits of Parks and Open Space"
-- http://www.tpl.org
"Economic Reasons for Conserving Wild Nature"
-- http://www.sciencemag.org (Science 9 August 2002: Vol. 297. no. 5583, pp. 950 - 953)
•
|
