Air and Survival in the age of Environmental Crisis and Climate Change

Uliana Kovalenko (Russia)
Honorable Mentions

 The train with stacks of trees is passing slowly before our eyes somewhere at the small station on the south of Arkhangelsk region. “This wood is taken to the paper mill. That Birch is taken to plywood production and pine is taken for sawmilling” - forest certification expert tells me.
When My friends from Swedish ecovillage describes me how people won the court against large lime-mining company, I understand the reason of their optimism. It is believable that problem can be resolved if you live in the state where government and NGOs together create ecological programs, where cars use biogase and renewable energetics grows. It is possible to believe that we can overcome the problem even if it is so complex. There are so many incredible people, communities and organizations… As it was said by the authors of the Home movie, “it is too late to be pessimists”.
However, when I read that radioactive waste was buried nearby the river in Moscow park and Moscow government wants to build a new road near that place, when I read about tons of waste taken out from Moscow to regions and similar news, when I sit on the bench and observe train with ex-forest passing I understand that I live in another reality.

I wonder, in which reality the most of the planet lives? In which reality do live tropical forests, melting icebergs, endangered species? Is it too late to be pessimists?

* * *

If one says that it is too late to preclude the catastrophe, doesn’t he or she removes the ground of ecological movements? Would it help if instead of optimism we got despair and instead of action towards sustainability people would give up? How then is it possible to convince governments and people that we should invest in ecological initiatives and protecting air from CO2 and other pollutions?
However, isn’t rejection to admit the catastrophe led to the death of many people and lack of adequate actions during the first day after Chernobyl breakdown?

Admitting the crisis is always a hard step. Still, most of people can overcome the shock and begin to act. Therefore, in order to save humans and non-humans from the catastrophe consequences it is necessary to make a first step - to admit the crisis.
Although it is possible to learn about disaster scale in the papers of the Club of Rome, the Stockholm Resilience Center or Climate researches, this conclusions doesn’t convince a person who refuse to admit the reality until there is a possibility to maintain usual way of living.

From childhood we were told that human mind is capable to solve any problems and that any ecological issues can be resolved by new technologies or by improvements of our actions. However, we do not know about any big civilization which existed sustainably and long time on this planet. We created “sustainable development” concept, but in fact we don’t know how it is possible for our civilization to make shift to this state. Nobody has done it before. Despite many loud speeches and wasted money, we haven’t succeed in this task. We need to stop relying on inspiring ideas like ”sustainable development” because these ideas exist mainly on symbolic level, not in biological or physical reality where we live. The reality of the climate change and the sixth mass extinction. The reality that changes so fast.
We calm ourselves with the idea that we still have some time and this apparently will be our solace until the very last moment.

It is possible to wake up only if we will understand that the situation now is not another crisis like the Great Depression or another decline happening each 30-60 years. The wave of the current crisis began around 10000 years ago with the invention of agriculture and grew slowly with the increasing population and technological development. It is not so important how many years we still have before the disaster. It is more important that we still don’t know how to act and how to change ourselves. Sometimes we even reject the very existence of the crisis. However, if we will admit the disaster we cannot prevent, how will it influence ecological movements, their activities and plans? What will be their agenda? What will they demand from national governments?
 
We need to acknowledge that Amazons, Siberia and other old forests serve us as climate regulators, playing a key role in transporting moist air masses into the depths of the continents and protecting vast areas from drought. Old forest protection should be a priority for the UN and other international organizations.
Besides preserving key ecosystems, we need to use these last years of stable life to prepare for the active phase of the crisis, to create centers of post-crisis regenerative culture that can restore ecological and social systems after decline.
Air protection is a key factor for our survival. In the context of the environmental and climate crisis, this means that we should protect air not only from existing threats, but also from threats that may be caused by destabilization of the social, political and economic situation. Journalists, activists, scientists, ecologists, politicians, environmental movements and civil society need to raise the alarm and demand not only crisis recognition (like the Extinction Rebellion movement does), but also demand safe disposal of radioactive and highly toxic substances that can cause air pollution and disasters in the time of social, political and ecological crises. It seems that today our duty is not to prevent the crisis we are not able to prevent, but to prepare ourselves and ecosystems to this crisis and to protect air, ground, water and living species from deadly technological disasters that could be caused by social, political and ecological crises of the next decades. It’s too late to be pessimistic, but it is too late to be optimistic as well. The time has come to acknowledge the situation and to act in the name of life.