Humans and the planet

A practical and moderate approach would be to continue using coal or nuclear for base load power and employing a variety of renewables for peak loads. Further advances in storage batteries and alternative renewable and other technologies would make their use more practical and reduce and eliminate the need for fossil or nuclear over time.

Other Damage

Deforestation

Deforestation continues on a large scale across the planet (due mainly to population increase and modern technology) reducing the rate of photosynthesis where plants absorb carbon dioxide and emit oxygen, the oxygen being vital for life. Photosynthesis is a process by which plants convert carbon dioxide, water and solar energy into glucose and free oxygen (6CO₂ + 6H₂O + ^solar -----> C₆H₁₂O₆ + 6O₂) . Without photosynthesis there would be essentially no oxygen in the atmosphere and our lives depend on oxygen.

Deforestation tends to increase carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, because the rate of absorption decreases with deforestation in accordance with Le Chatelier's Principle. Perhaps massive deforestation contributed to the increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution rather than or as well as carbon dioxide emissions? The increased carbon dioxide will help to drive photosynthesis (Le Chatelier's Principle).Without photosynthesis we will all die of oxygen starvation.

There is no reported apparent change in oxygen concentration, and remember oxygen is an unstable gas in the atmosphere, and we perhaps should be more concerned with maintaining oxygen levels (approximately 20% of the atmosphere) rather than panic about a miniscule increase in carbon dioxide, a gas which is needed for photosynthesis, vital to life as we know it. The dynamic equilibrium supporting our existence is maintaining itself for the time being.

Why is there no panic about oxygen concentration which will fall if there is not enough carbon dioxide being absorbed for photosynthesis? Lack of oxygen means death and oxygen is an unstable gas. Its instability in a free form as elemental gas is not universally recognized and yet it constitutes nearly 20% of the atmosphere and is vital to humanity.

Plastic

We are trashing the oceans with plastic. Once in the water plastic never fully biodegrades, at least for most plastic waste at the moment. There are 5 major ocean gyres. The largest and best known is the Great Garbage Patch in the north Pacific - a concentrated soup of microplastics, or tiny fragments less than 5 mm across. It is 3 times the size of France and was discovered in 1997. It is believed to be the largest plastic dump on Earth with 7 million tonnes mass and up to 3 metres deep. Plastics have only been mass produced since the 1950s. Plastic in the ocean is a real threat to marine life which is part of our food chain. With global production of plastic increasing exponentially, the trashing of the oceans can only increase greatly unless changes are made. Using only biodegradable plastic, if this is possible, would be an immaculate solution to prevent trashing the planet with plastic waste.

Population

The current world population estimate (June 2019) by the UN is 7.7 billion. It is estimated that it took 200,000 years for world population to reach 1 billion and then only 200 years more to reach 7 billion. It is believed that recently rate of growth has slowed a little, but estimated current increase in population is about 80 million people a year. The UN believes that fertility rates will drop (from 2.5 in 2019 to 2.2 in 2050) but still project that the world population will reach 10 billion by 2050. Clearly the finite resources of the planet places limits on the number of us that can live comfortably, even allowing for technological advancement, so the current exponential increase in population cannot be sustained. Each person leaves a footprint on the planet so keeping our numbers at a comfortable level is the first step towards looking after the planet, helping to ensure our own survival.

Our Footprint

The footprint that an individual leaves on the planet is largely determined by standard of living. Those in rich countries leave a greater footprint, generally speaking, than those in poorer countries. The production of goods and services which sustains us and improves our standard of living requires raw materials (water, land, forestry, mining) and if these natural resources are non-renewable they will eventually become depleted, despite whatever technological advances may be made.

Conclusion

The biggest threat to our own survival is the combined effect of our own successful propagation and our natural desire to improve our standard of living, not carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, nor how much renewable energy is used. Renewable energy alone will not save the planet. We are abusing the planet and trashing it like hungry locusts...but we do far more damage and are arrogant about it.

For a sustainable future, we must humanely stop population increase as it is now, sensibly limit our cumulative footprint including decreased exploitation of non-renewable resources and generally take care of the planet. The alternative is war, famine and disease, or even extinction, whatever other steps we might take. There is no Planet B available at this time so we should look after this one to look after ourselves.

For many, life is a constant struggle, immediate survival being the only important thing, and the future of humanity and the planet is, understandably, not high on their agenda. Without some co-ordinated effort across the world, which is highly unlikely, among people with vastly different living standards, differing priorities, values, attitudes and beliefs, we will drift along as we are, being in plague proportions and trashing the planet, slowly killing the goose that laid the golden egg.