You, a Sheep, an Otter and a Hare
I saw one infographic about the biomass of humans in relation to the wild and domesticated mammals.
I couldn't believe that graph - do we outweigh all the wild lions, monkeys, bears, kangaroos, mice, elephants ... by a factor 9:1?
The quoted article estimates the biomass in terms of GtC (billions of tonnes of carbon. A human being has roughly 8 kg of carbon (and ~60 kg of other elements) and mankind has a total biomass of 6 GtC, for example. See also the book The Earth's Biosphere: Evolution, Dynamics and Change (I need to confess, that I haven't read that book).
The total biomass for humans outweigh the wild mammals by a factor 9:1.
What does this mean for us? Let's return to the small island that I discussed before, where the land area of the world is divided evenly between all humans.
You'll find it slightly smaller but don't worry about that. On that island, it is you (~80 kg), a ram (an adult male sheep of 136 kg), a tiny sea otter (5 kg) and a European land hare (4 kg). The wildlife on your island will be quite ... limited.
Estimating the biomass for different life forms is tricky, and the authors are discussing the data and its quality. But the numbers will give a rough indication about the proportions between different animals.
Back in the days...
It is very difficult to estimate the number of land mammals on the planet now. It is even harder to estimate the number of land mammals tens of thousands of years ago, but one estimate that the researchers quote indicates six times more wild land mammals before humans roamed the biosphere. That would mean 54 kg of wild mammals on your island, instead of 9 kg today.
The domesticated mammals are, obviously, more numerous today. Therefore, the total biomass of mammals is much higher today. But that also means that many wild individuals, and species, are gone.
Conclusion: We must understand that we are many people on a small planet. I still believe we can hold a big population of human beings, given that we stop our excessive use of limited resources.
And we need to stop removing the habitats of wild mammals, trading coral reefs for Coca Cola, icebergs for iPhones and rain forests for holiday trips.
Side note 1: I told you not to worry but if you're still reading, you're kind of begging for it... The global population has increased by some 70 million people (the same size as Thailand or the United Kingdom) and they need to live somewhere. 70 millions more to share the world will make it a bit smaller for everyone.
Side note 2:
We will not move to a new home this year. Without any new furniture this year, my prediction is ~2.8 tonnes of CO2e for personal consumption.
 |
| Note that the wild animals (mammals) include both marine mammals and land mammals. |
The quoted article estimates the biomass in terms of GtC (billions of tonnes of carbon. A human being has roughly 8 kg of carbon (and ~60 kg of other elements) and mankind has a total biomass of 6 GtC, for example. See also the book The Earth's Biosphere: Evolution, Dynamics and Change (I need to confess, that I haven't read that book).
 |
| https://xkcd.com/1338/ |
What does this mean for us? Let's return to the small island that I discussed before, where the land area of the world is divided evenly between all humans.
You'll find it slightly smaller but don't worry about that. On that island, it is you (~80 kg), a ram (an adult male sheep of 136 kg), a tiny sea otter (5 kg) and a European land hare (4 kg). The wildlife on your island will be quite ... limited.
Estimating the biomass for different life forms is tricky, and the authors are discussing the data and its quality. But the numbers will give a rough indication about the proportions between different animals.
Back in the days...
It is very difficult to estimate the number of land mammals on the planet now. It is even harder to estimate the number of land mammals tens of thousands of years ago, but one estimate that the researchers quote indicates six times more wild land mammals before humans roamed the biosphere. That would mean 54 kg of wild mammals on your island, instead of 9 kg today.
I'm afraid Alan isn't around anymore.
The domesticated mammals are, obviously, more numerous today. Therefore, the total biomass of mammals is much higher today. But that also means that many wild individuals, and species, are gone.
Conclusion: We must understand that we are many people on a small planet. I still believe we can hold a big population of human beings, given that we stop our excessive use of limited resources.
And we need to stop removing the habitats of wild mammals, trading coral reefs for Coca Cola, icebergs for iPhones and rain forests for holiday trips.
Side note 1: I told you not to worry but if you're still reading, you're kind of begging for it... The global population has increased by some 70 million people (the same size as Thailand or the United Kingdom) and they need to live somewhere. 70 millions more to share the world will make it a bit smaller for everyone.
Side note 2:
We will not move to a new home this year. Without any new furniture this year, my prediction is ~2.8 tonnes of CO2e for personal consumption.
Kommentarer
Skicka en kommentar