About 65 million years ago,
a mass extinction event occurred,
wiping out more than 75%
of all species on Earth.
There have only been 5 mass extinctions
in our planet's 4.5 billion year history.
But the next one has already started.
By the end of this century,
one in six species on Earth could be gone.
Will humans go with them?
How could we survive a sixth mass extinction?
How could we prevent one?
The reason we're all still alive on this planet
is thanks to biodiversity.
From the tallest trees,
to the biggest animals,
to the weirdest plants,
to the grossest fungi,
to the buzziest bugs, and,
even the creatures you can't see,
we all rely on each other
to make life on Earth possible!
And our world would be harmonious
except that...
humans are unreliable.
Thanks to our unstable practices,
the world's wildlife is inching towards
an extinction rate that's 10,000 times faster
than what is considered to be natural.
Without taking drastic action,
we might be facing extinction ourselves.
But how far are we willing to go?
Pulitzer Prize-winning author and biologist
E.O. Wilson came up with
what is now known as the
"Half-Earth idea."
It involves making half the planet
a "human-free" zone,
leaving nature to do what it can
to stabilize itself.
This means that the current global population
of roughly 7.7 billion people
would have to make do with
half the space we currently have.
And for a lot of people, that's just not feasible.
Cordoning off half the world
for extreme conservation
would displace roughly one billion people.
Most of them from low income backgrounds.
Think of those parts of the world
where overpopulation is severe,
and then imagine that situation everywhere!
But housing isn't our only concern.
We also need food and fresh water to survive!
Today, one-third of Earth’s land surface
and 75% of its freshwater resources
are used for crop and livestock production.
Yet at least 10% of Earth's population
doesn't have enough food.
How many more people will go hungry
when we no longer have access
to those resources?
Economically speaking,
the forest and fuel industries could collapse
because there'd be less land to work with.
This would leave millions of people out of work.
But the losses might be recouped
in the form of new opportunities
in more sustainable fields.
In fact, setting aside half the planet
for environmental protection
wouldn't be a total financial disaster.
$577 billion (US) in annual global crops
are currently at risk due to pollinator loss,
while roughly 40% of the world’s economy
as a whole
relies on biological resources.
If we continue down the path we're on,
we risk depleting the bee population
in its entirety,
as well as the other biological resources
we depend on.
But by protecting them,
their declining numbers may have
the opportunity to regenerate,
so that we can continue to benefit
from their output in a sustainable way.
Of course, it's not just about the money.
The fact is that
the more biodiverse an ecosystem is,
the healthier it is.
A healthy ecosystem can clean water,
help to purify the air we breathe,
regulate the climate,
maintain the soil needed for crops and food,
plus recycle nutrients while we're at it.
In short, we can't afford to continuing living
in a way that accelerates
the extinction of other species.
Because we need them
as much as they need us.
The Half-Earth idea, might be too much.
In fact, it's virtually impossible to implement.
But the consequences of doing
the bare minimum would be even worse.
We've got to spread the word, and
remind each other that
we're all in this together.
No matter how big,
no matter how small.
Because every time a species goes extinct,
it brings humans closer to our own extinction.
Don't believe me?
Have you ever wondered
what would happen to us
if all the world's insects disappeared?
Well, that's a story for another WHAT IF.