|
Page dedicated to themes related to the ecosystem, with
reference to normative issues or issues of institutional
interest.
The topics are looked at by considering technical details that
can contribute to making public opinion aware of a new
sensitivity and an ability of operational intervention which is
useful to the solution of the issues.
The new vision that the ecosystem offers
Before being able to enter into in the various environmental
themes, it is opportune to establish some concepts so as to be
able to subsequently observe the various aspects with a broad
vision.
The comprehension of these aspects is useful for the
re-examination of some cultural attitudes and some human
behaviour.
Science, technology, politics and so on cannot move coherently
if they do not understand that a different and more complete
approach is necessary for the things that surround us.
Among these, the system within the systems assumes a particular
importance. The System that guarantees that every form of life
has the possibility to be born, to grow and to reproduce. The
system that allows man, the creature above all creatures, to be
born, to grow and to know. We are evidently speaking of the
ecosystem, a relatively new term which is increasingly present
today in our discussions and our culture.
The term ecosystem was proposed for the first time, in
1935, by the English ecologist Tansley, even if the concept of
ecosystem as an idea of a togetherness between organisms and the
environment, goes back to ancient times.
The fact that this term was coined only in the XX century shows
the resistance that it has met in trying to enter official
scientific terminology.
Environmental emergencies,
pollution,
desertification etc.
have brought
to the general attention an environmental sensitivity never
before seen in the history of
man, and with it a sociological evolution of the
phenomenon that only
future history can really evaluate.
Currently we are in a historical phase in which the demands for
its protection are not fully included in the socioeconomic
system, which instead finds notable obstacles in observing its
principles.
The reality is that the ecosystem model and the socioeconomic
model act on different logics and at the base of these there are
two poles between
which the ancient world is migrating towards the modern one.
The Logic of the ecosystem
The ecosystem can be defined, without possibility of being
proved wrong, as the most complex existing thermodynamic motor.
Through it the energy coming from the Sun or potentially
contained in our planet (chemical energy, geothermic, etc) is
gradually transformed and used by
living beings.
Every living being develops the role of a single monad of this
complex energy motor and every single monad has a particular
irreplaceable energy assignment; in conclusion, expressing the
matter in a figurative manner, we can say that in the
transformation of
energy, every single organism plays a part in a well-defined
section of the
thermodynamic transformation line.
Up until the point of using all the transformable energy.
These evaluations evidently lead to three necessary
considerations.
The first is that in
such a complex thermodynamic motor, the greater the system of
single monads is diversified, the more efficiently the
motor works.
The second leads to the concept of
biodiversity as "conditio sine qua non" to guarantee the
best output of the thermodynamic motor.
The third is that there do not exist useless or harmful
organisms
but only altered conditions
in which
every new condition of the system
corresponds to a new mass action
towards a new equilibrium.
In conclusion, the ecosystem is organized according to some
principles (thermodynamic) which are structured with the purpose
to increase the energy output to the possible limit allowed by
the laws of the physics.
The unidirectional flow of energy through the production, the
consumption and the
decomposition of biotic components in nature, as a universal
phenomenon, is the result, therefore, of the principles of
thermodynamics.
The first principle establishes, that energy can be transformed
from one type (for example light) into another (for example
potential energy) but it is neither created nor destroyed.
The 2nd principle establishes that a process of energy
transformation will never happen
without there being contemporarily a degradation of
energy from a concentrated form to a dissipated form; since part
of the energy is always dispersed into thermal energy which is
practically not usable, no spontaneous transformation (such as
that of light into
nourishment) can
have an output of one hundred percent.
Lessons to be had from the general rules of
ecology
If the monads are connected between each other, if
everything has a role and a
precise direction, and if the cycles prepared by
nature are the most appropriate, when the environmental
system changes, it does so by only contracting a debt with
nature.
It can be deduced
that in ecology, as in economics, there can be no profit without
paying a certain cost. Thus it is necessary not to act in
contrast with the workings of
nature, otherwise a so-called ecological boomerang may be
encountered: every unanticipated and harmful consequence coming
from a modification of the environment renders void the aim for
which the modification was planned or creates even more serious problems.
If, therefore, nature is structured on systems of low pollution (the concept
of pollution is correlated to the impossibility of obtaining
unitary outputs) then it is evident that the actual
socioeconomic model has been based on an energy model of low
output and therefore of high pollution.
Modernity and future scenarios
We must reflect on the fact that up until now we have considered
as modern: chimneys, the rhythms and
habits of a costly life, disposable products etc…
This does not mean that we have to condemn everything that we have done up until today: it
would be far too superficial and unbeneficial.
It is all part of the history of
man and humanity, made up of attempts, errors,
experience, learning.
After the discovery of
fire, we have discovered the environment; now we must
learn not to burn ourselves.
How?
First of all, it is no longer possible to consider local or
national politics only on the basis of monetary output. This is
too superficial a parameter.
The whole political issue must be moved (and it will need time)
not by a simple environmental sentimentalism, but by the
consideration that the environment is there for man and that
man has to start
thinking in environmental terms.
What does thinking in environmental terms mean?
It simply means to begin
programming life, the organization of every second, of every
place, as if to emulate the logics of the structuring of nature.
It "considers" every monad to be essential, useful and in need
of attention.
It knows that it can not do without them,
knows that it
will pay a price which is too high every time it renounces to
one of them.
Thinking in environmental terms means having a sensitivity
towards the things that do not have a contractual power; it
means moving the criterion of
capitalistic politics (based on laws of supply and demand), to
assume principles of
global protection for every entity on our planet.
It is, in practice, a new form of democracy; a wider, more
universal form, without either great elements or small,
fundamental or useless; because we are all
participants in the one great organism called planet
Earth.
It is then that the concept of ecosystem will assume a fuller
and less romantic meaning.
The culture that we have inherited today is the culture of a
world that has had the merit of leading us to this
new station. Now we have to climb aboard a more efficient
carriage, all of us together.
Guido Bissanti
|