- Email: [email protected]
Environmental technologies: Ordering biological development
COMMENTARY
Environmental Technologies: Ordering Biological Development Carl N. Hodges
The participants in this conference, and the readers of this paper, are undoubtedly familiar, to a great degree, with the current status of the environment of our home: the earth. Both sponsoring organizations, the Meteorology and Environmental Protection Administration of Saudi Arabia (MEPA) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), have published extensively on the subject. Our biosphere, the living environment that supports us all, has serious problems, and we humans are mainly responsible. There are 385,000 more of us every day-a new population equivalent to that of Arriyadh every four days. And we do not live “gently” on the earth. The five billion of us require air, water, food, energy, housing and amenities, and as we have developed the earth to provide them, we have created problems. That the problems exist and are serious is the bad news. That we are recognizing them, and by meetings such as this increasing our determination and joint abilities to solve the problems, is the good news. A valuable contribution to our discussions is provided by those who have defined the magnitude of our challenge-and here I rely largely on United Nations data. We have grown from three billion to five billion in less than fifty years, and in that time we have moved to the cities. Fifty years ago, only one-fourth of us lived in cities. Now it is almost one-half and increasing. As we have grown in numbers, our degree of urbanization and industrialization has grown even faster than our numbers. Only forty years ago, as a result of our use of energy, we put 6,000 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the air per year. Today we put more than 25,000 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the air. We have forced the carbon cycle of the earth’s atmosphere out of balance. The green plants can no longer take the carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere (and produce our oxygen) as fast as we humans put carbon dioxide in. And, to make matters worse, we are reducing the number of plants on the earth working to bring things into balance. We destroy twelve million hectares of tropical rain forest every year (and with that Carl N. Hodges, Journal
of Social
ISSN: 0140-1750
Director,
Environmental
and Biological
Structures
Research Lab, University 13(2):83-92.
of Arizona,
Tucson Copyright 0 1990 by JAI F’ms. Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.
83
a4 -
CARL N. HODGES
we destroy its great genetic diversity). We also lose an equal amount of agricultural land by poor cultivation practices, overuse, erosion and drought. The result is that the carbon dioxide of the atmosphere is increasing at such a rate that, if we continue as we are now, it will double by 1450H (2030 AD). And, since carbon dioxide in the atmosphere acts as a “heat trap” for the earth, that increase will result in a drastic warming of the earth, possibly by as much as 1.5 to 4.5 degrees Celsius. Such an increase would have disastrous results in terms of reduced rainfall in many areas, increasing desertification, and possibly a dramatic increase in the level of the sea, which would flood many areas of the world. A global warming of 4.5 degrees in only four to five decades would exceed the entire rise in temperature since the last ice age-and we humans will have caused it. In the paper “Islamic Principles for the Conservation of the Natural Environment”‘, of which MEPA was a co-sponsor, the “Glorious Q&an” is quoted. God says, “... and produced therein all kinds of things in due balance.” I would propose that, with the gift of intelligence that we have been given, we take re-establishing “balance” in our environment as the theme of our conference report, as our challenge as participants, and as our responsibility to present and future generations. As I try to think constructively about what to do in this area, both as an individual and as a part of the culture and organizations to which I belong, I find a “context setting” book, Entropy, into the Greenhouse World2, by the American environmentalist, Jeremy Rifkin, to be particularly helpful. Rifkin, from my perception, is an extreme pessimist. Maybe because of that he can focus so precisely on the negatives of human activities and delineate them for us. He does that well, and I recommend his book for your library for the completeness of his list of our environmental challenges. More importantly, I recommend Rifkin for thinking about his principal thesis; that is, that we live in a world of decreasing order (and resources) because of the thermodynamic reality that every time we humans do anything, we use up resources. And, as there are more and more of us, we use more and more resources. Thus the world is “running down,” and our only reality, according to Rifkin, is to make the best of a declining “quality of life,” at least as quality is defined by our industrialized societies. Here, to an extent, I disagree with Mr. Rifkin. Certainly a value of “quality of life” based on materialism is wanting, and that is well addressed in “Islamic Principles for the Conservation of the Natural Environment.” But, humans do need “necessities” to support the full dimensions of our life. And, it is my firm belief that it is an imbalance in our current focus on development, as we produce those necessities, that has led to the imbalance in our environment. Thus this seminar, “Environment and Development in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,” is exactly where we-should be. We need industrial development. We need to do it well, and that requires the application of intelligence, because, by definition, industrial activity processes resources, reduces their availability in nature, and creates waste (pollution). Here Bifkin is correct; there is no way around that. The laws of thermodynamics prevail. The increase in non-availability of material and energy is defined as an increase in disorder, or physicists use the vocabulary “an increase in entropy. ” An increase in entropy means that the system is “running down.” But, even if we are running down in terms of using up energy and
Environmental
Technologies: Ordering
Biological
Development
-
85
materials, we can minimize pollution with the best possible processes, and we can then handle that pollution such that it has minimum impact on the environment. Further, at the same time we focus on industrial development (as we should), we must balance that with an equal focus on biological development-not just biological protection-if we want to reverse the “running down.” It is life itself that determines our environment. Before there was plant life on earth, our atmosphere was high in carbon dioxide and low in oxygen. But plants processed the carbon dioxide into carbohydrates and oxygen (food to eat and air to breathe). The clouds over the rain forest that benefit the trees with shade and rain are partly there because of the trees themselves transpiring water into the atmosphere. The British scientist, James Lovelock, developed his Gaia hypothesis from studying the atmosphere of other planets and how different they are from the unique atmosphere of earth. Our earth’s plants make oxygen, animals use oxygen and eat plants. Animals give off nutrients and carbon dioxide that, in turn, are used by plants. We do not understand the many intricacies of the interactions, but our atmosphere is “balanced” by life itself. (And God says, “There is not a thing but celebrates His praise, and yet ye understand not how they declare its glory!” ‘) Now, our own human life, primarily through our actions and industrialization, is more and more deteriorating of our environment. Industrialization has the effect, if looked at from its total environmental impact, of reducing the availability of energy and resources, and increasing disorder. That is, as a product is made, the product itself is organized, but the energy and resources used to make it are no longer available, and waste (pollution) has been created. Entropy has increased. On the other hand, a biological plant (whether a date tree, a wheat plant or a flower) uses sunshine coming to us from outside the earth to increase order. The plant takes carbon from the atmosphere and concentrates it as carbohydrates, and it takes nutrients dispersed in the soil and concentrates them in its tissue. And the plant can even take what might be thought of as “pollutants” from the air and soil as nutrients, if we do not push the plant’s environment too far out of balance. Because of the activity of plants using energy from the sun, entropy from the standpoint of the earth itself has decreased. Order has increased, and we have greatly benefited. Unfortunately, as we have moved to the cities, we have neglected the balance of biology. Our agriculture in many countries of the world has made great progress in terms of productivity-but often at the expense of balance. My own country of the United States of America has a wonderfully productive agricultural system. It takes only two American farmers to feed 100 Americans and still have some food for export to the rest of the world. That has “freed” us non-farmers for many activities, many of them associated with industrialization. Tragically, for future generations, however, our agriculture does not decrease entropy (disorder) as it might-and should. It is estimated that American farmers use as much as ten calories of fossil fuel energy to produce one calorie of food energy. We do not recycle nutrients to the extent that we should. The U.S. loses over a billion tons of top soil to erosion every year. One estimate is that one-third of our top soil is now lost. Like those of us at this conference, we are recognizing our problems. The challenges are great. The world in the future, to the extent possible for every area, must have a productive,
86 -
CARL N. HODGES
“ordering” biological activity to balance development if future generations are to have the environment necessary for humanity’s existence and joy. To provide that Ordering Biological Development is a great challenge and a great opportunity. It will require application of all the sciences, even the development of new sciences, and it will require great cooperation between individuals, organizations and nations. The dean of American business books, Peter Drucker, in his latest publication, The New Realities3, talks about the requirement for transnational ecology. This audience knows, of course, that it is planetary ecology that we need, but we will have to take many paths and intermediate steps to that “reality” as we truly integrate ecological requirements and development. Space Biospheres Ventures, the group that is developing Biosphere II, uses the word “ecotechnics,” the combination of ecology and technology. I recommend their literature4 for a review of the potential of learning to be better stewards of our biosphere, the earth, by developing research biospheres, and for the new science they practice, biospherics. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a blessed country. You have great quantities of stored energy in the form of fossil fuel for industrial development. You also have great quantities of “renewable” solar energy, the primary energy source for the balance to industrial development -that is, Ordering Biological Development. Numbers are interesting and can give us a basis for future discussions (probably mostly in follow-ups to this seminar), even if at the early stages they are only approximations. If the Kingdom exports 1,500 million barrels of oil per year (at 85 percent carbon), then wherever in the world that oil is used, approximately 200 million tons of carbon are released to the atmosphere. (This is about 2.6 percent of the total). On a worldwide basis, the earth is currently recycling about half the carbon put into the atmosphere. The other half is accumulating in the atmosphere and contributing to the warming of the earth. Assume for a moment that, as part of a worldwide effort to “balance” the carbon cycle of the earth, Saudi Arabia wanted to recapture its exported carbon for reuse. Then it would need to establish an Organizing Biological Development to take 100 million tons of carbon from the atmosphere by photosynthesis and “fix” it into carbohydrates (plant material). It is important to recognize that this would be a contribution by Saudi Arabia to solving a worldwide problem that we all share; but if correctly done, it would also be developing an opportunity for Saudi Arabia. The carbohydrates (farm products) produced have value; in some cases greater value per unit than the carbon in the form of oil. Research has been done on converting oil directly to food. The removal of carbon from the atmosphere by photosynthesis does exactly this plus “captures” some solar energy in the process. For us to create an Organizing Biological Development, we must account for all the inputs and outputs of our efforts and not make the mistake of creating a biological activity that requires more energy than it L‘captures” from sunshine. We must also consider the other inputs for photosynthesis, water and nutrients. This paper will be much too long if I develop all the logic from basic consideration, so let me jump to my first suggested specific environmental technology for Saudi Arabia: seawater-irrigated agriculture at the desert coast of the Kingdom. On the earth, only one-half of one percent of the water is liquid fresh water. The other 99.5 percent is in the ice caps or in the oceans. Two-thirds of the earth is covered with seawater. In human terms, seawater is essentially an infinite resource. The Kingdom has
Environmental
Technologies: Ordering
Biological
Development
-
87
access to that resource on two coasts. If it were to develop 15 million hectares of farmlands on those coasts (and there are now crops that will grow productively on pure seawater), it would “balance” or bring back to the Kingdom the “imbalance” carbon it is exporting. Those 15 million hectares would be 55 percent of the agricultural land now being lost in the world every year. Assuming that the seawater farming only replaced the per unit value of that land, then the 15 million hectares would yield 12 billion dollars in value to the .Kingdom. But, in reality, the potential value of crops from seawater irrigation is much greater, and in the future, with correct Ordering Biological Development of that farmland, the value could be several times higher than the 12 billion dollars per year. And that would be in terms of today’s economic systems that do not take into account true environmental cost-or more importantly, in this case, environmental benefits. Figure 1 shows an important aspect to the “ordering” done by seawater-based farming for us. Irrigation with seawater returns nutrients from the sea to the land on a large scale for the first time as the plants remove nutrients from the water for their growth. We, of course, do that on a small scale every time we eat a fish from the sea and our wastes go to the land. Nutrients taken back from the sea by seawater agriculture can be transported to the interior of the country for environmental benefit there. We have heard about the deterioration of the rangelands in the Kingdom. Perhaps by bringing fodder from the seashore for supplemental feed and correct management of grazing animals we can “rebuild” the rangelands for their own sake and for the positive benefit to the total environment. Grasslands remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and cool and clean the air.
@
DISORDER
INCREASING
DEVELOPMENT
@
ORDERING
BIOLOGICAL
DEVELOPMENT
Figure I.
(ENTROPY
(ORD)
INCREASING)
(ENTROPY
DECREASING)
Ordering biological development by sea-water-basedagriculture
88 -
CARL N. HODGES
Further, if we add seawater-based aquaculture (the growing of fish, shrimp and other marine products) to the system, we can increase the economic potential, increase the “ordering,” and increase the flow of those ordered products to the interior of the country. Figure 2 shows the specific “balancing” with one of the many industrialized cities vi: which the Kingdom is linked in the carbon cycle. The drawing could as well have been for 2 European, American, or any city of the world. We have only one atmosphere, and it links LIE all together. In the future, as oil reserves decline and the price of oil increases (as it should ant must), we can switch from exclusively petrochemical-based industries to partially biochemically-based. The carbohydrates from seawater farms will provide industrial feedstock in the future. When that happens, the carbon cycle of the atmosphere can be balanced on an annua basis. For the immediate future, however, seawater farms need to store carbon in addition tc providing food for humans and animals that quickly re-enters the atmosphere as carbor dioxide. That can be done. The current best crop for seawater irrigation is the halophyte crop SOS-7 (Salicomia Oil Seed, seventh year of selection) (see Table 1). SOS-7 produce: approximately 20 metric tons per hectare of biomass. Of that, about 10 percent is a seec which contains 30 percent high-quality vegetable oil for human consumption and 70 percen high-protein meal for human and animal food. The seed will be consumed, as will part of the
Figure 2.
Example city balance of the carbon cycle.
Environmental
TABLE
1. Production
Technologies: Ordering
Data and Analysis
Summary
of Field Producrion
Biological Development
of Halophyte
Total Biomass Straw Salt (ash) Oilseed Oil Meal
Data Percent of total
20.0 10.8 7.2 2.0 0.6 1.4 Characteristics
of Halophyte
89
(SOS-7) Oil
MTIHA
Biomass
-
100 54 36 10 3 7 (SOS-7)
Oil
The physical properties of the oil demonstrate that this is an excellent quality vegetable oil. The iodine value of 156 may appear to be low for a high 18:2 oil (oil high in linoleic acid), but this can also be true for safflower oil, another high 18:2 oil. This oil can substitute for oils with 18:2 contents of 50 to 55 percent, such as soybean and cottonseed oil. The 18:l (oleic acid) content of this halophyte oil is similar to that of cottonseed, soybean and palm kernel oil. The chlorophyll content at 2.2 ppm is high compared to (for example) corn oil. A second bleaching step removes the residual chlorophyll and gives a Lovibond color of lOY10.8R; thus it should present no problem on a commercial scale. Without the second bleaching, the visual appearance of the color is similar to that of olive oil. The oil is similar to soybean oil in its storage characteristics. It can easily be partially hydrogenated to lower its degree of unsaturation for improved (extended) shelf life. Standard tests conducted at the University of Arizona Nutrition and Food Science Department indicate that this oil easily substitutes for safflower oil or butter in recipes for sauces, salad dressings, bread, pie crust, etc. The characteristics of SOS-7 vegetable oil have been determined by the Archer Daniels Midland Co. (ADM) of Decatur, Illinois, and analyzed separately by ERL’s analytical laboratory. The various physical properties are summarized for the processed oil (i.e., refined, bleached and deodorized). The samples processed by ADM were from 1984 harvests. The ERL samples are composite values from harvests over the last four years. Physical
a.
Moisture
and volatile
b.
Soap
c.
Free fatty
d.
Specific
e.
Saponification
f.
Iodine
g.
Unsaponifiable
h.
Color:
i.
Flavor
j.
Chlorophyll
acids
matter
(as oleic)
gravity value
value matter
photometric Lovibond
’
Properties ADM
ERL
0.10%
0.12%
3.0 ppm
ND*
0.03%
0.05%
ND
0.9223 (21125” C)
ND
182-191mg K0FB.g oil
156
ND
ND
0.8%
ND 15Y/0.8R
1.18 in progress
bland
bland to nutty
2.2 ppm
2.7 ppm
90
-
CARL N. HODGES TABLE
1. Production
Data and Analysis Physical
of Halophyte
(SOS-7) Oil Conrinued
Properties ALIM
ERL
3.9
ND
6.9%
2.3% 14.1% 73.1% 2.4% 1.2%
7.6% 2.8% 13.2% 73.6% 2.1% 0.7%
ND
475” F
o. Cold test
ND
passes
o. Neutral oil
98.9%
98.2%
k. Peroxide 1. Fatty acid profile:
m. Smoke point
palmitic stearic oleic linoleic linolenic other
*ND = Not Determined
“straw.” However, part of the straw will be stored as we build topsoil by recycling it to the earth (instead of destroying topsoil as is often the case), and part of it will be used as a “wood” for building material. Perhaps storing carbon in the walls of much-needed housing for our increasing numbers will be one of the best uses. A shrimp farm is the “front end” of one SOS-7 farm. This has the attractive feature of the nutrients from the waste of the shrimp becoming part of the nutrient source for the plants, and some of the product of the plants being part of the food for the shrimp. I do not propose that Saudi Arabia plan to irrigate 15 million hectares of land with seawater. That may be far too much. Perhaps the Kingdom’s role is to be an example for the world and develop only the area for the Kingdom’s maximum economic benefit. I am sure that will be large, but how large will depend on many factors. What is the future of farms irrigated with fresh water? How much seawater-irrigated area would assure food selfsufficiency? How will the world climate change even if we make our best efforts? What is the relative value of farms in the Kingdom compared to seawater-inigated farms perhaps desperately needed in poor countries? And so on. But, the task I was given for my paper was to “discuss some environmental technologies, ’ ’ and I have talked about only one in specific: seawater-based agriculture. However, with that as my principal example and with the contribution to our vocabulary of Ordering Biological Development, I hope I have set the stage for some creative future reasoning together. There are many technologies that the Kingdom is pursuing that are certainly environmental. The Royal Commission receiving the Sasakawa Environmental Award for Jubail and Yanbu is a striking example. You are in many cases minimizing pollution and then cleaning up what pollution exists with the best available techniques. Nevertheless, I would suggest that you complement that success with increased attention to Ordering Biological Development in addition to biological protection. I will give two more examples from my own laboratory’s work -- “organic agriculture” and biological air purification.
Environmental
Technologies: Ordering
Biological
Development
-
91
I am sure that most of you are familiar with the strong movement around the world toward what is termed “organic agriculture.” This usually means minimizing outside inputs of energy and material (increasing the potential for “ordering”) and improving the “healthfulness” of the products by reduction, or in many cases elimination, of pesticides and other potentially harmful chemicals. I do not believe that our world agriculture can quickly convert to “organic,” but we can work in that direction. We can reward the farmer who moves toward an “ordering” system, the one who builds soils instead of destroying them and who gives us the most healthy products possible within the constraints of how he or she must operate until we can give the farmer better “ecotechnologies.” In my laboratory’s work, we have produced a broad spectrum of food crops with no pesticides and essentially complete recycling of nutrients. Much of the results of that work now can be applied profitably on a commercial scale. Finally, to return to the idea of biology organizing waste (pollution) for us. I am sure we are all familiar with the use of treated wastewater for irrigation. The nutrients from that water are organized by the plants into the valuable product of the plant tissue. Using that same perspective, we believe that waste pollution in the air can be “organized” for us by biological systems if we enhance (develop) their capability. We do this with what we term a “Soil Bed Air Purifier.” This comes from our work with the scientists of Biosphere II. There, since the atmosphere within it is totally “closed in,” we must make sure that the air is continuously purified of any possible pollutants. These could be out-gassing from paints, ethylene from ripening tomatos, or many other compounds that in the earth’s biosphere would not be a problem because of the great volume of our atmosphere, but in the limited volume of Biosphere II are of concern. To avoid any problems, the air in Biosphere II is mechanically circulated through soil, and the biology cleans it for us. The soil absorbs some contaminants, microbes consume others, and plants use the microbes’ products for nutrients. A farmer, or anyone, who improves the soil is helping to clean the air. I believe that work to date on Soil Bed Air Purification merits the Kingdom looking into adding it as an additional technology to air pollution abatement efforts. This approach would entail the encouragement of even greater plant growth in the cities and industrial areas, and the evaluation of mechanically adding Soil Bed Air Purifier Systems where pollution is concentrated (such as along highways). Well, this paper is much longer than I intended. I want to thank MEPA and UNDP. I congratulate you on organizing this seminar. I hope my thoughts and a few numbers on Ordering Biological Development, as a contribution to balance, have been helpful. Thinking again of the MEPA pamphlet quoting the “Glorious Qur’an”: “On Doomsday, if anyone has a palm shoot in hand, he should plant it.” Looking around the Kingdom, I am pleased to say, I see planting continuously in process, and I see the potential for much much more.
This paper was prepared for the Seminar on “Environment and Development in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,” 21-23 Shaaban 1410 (18-20 March 1990), Tuwaiq Palace, Havy Ass&rat, Arriyadh; sponsored by the Meteorology and Environmental Protection Administration of Saudi Arabia (MEPA) and the United Nations Development Program (UNDP).
Acknowledgments:
92
-
CARL N. HODGES
First I would like to express my appreciation to Dr. Abdulbar Al-Gain of MEPA and Mr. Ahmad Namek of UNDP for this opportunity to be with you today. This discussion paper presents the work of many people, the entire staff of the Environmental Research Laboratory (ERL) of the University of Arizona, and particularly the team working on the specifics of applications of our research to the Kingdom: Dr. Don Baumgartner, Mr. Neal Hicks, Dr. Edward Glenn, Dr. James Riley, Dr. Robert Frye, Mr. George Mignon, Mr. Dan Parker and Mr. Steve Carter. Critical to our efforts has been the contribution of Ing. Carlos Mota and his people, who have produced the magnificent seawaterirrigated crops in Mexico. The creative thinking and developments of Space Biospheres Ventures, led by Margret Augustine, are vitally important to the future of the environment of our earth. And the interface to commercial applications for the work of ERL provided by the Planetary Design Corporation and its Chairman, Mr. William Wood Prince, is essential to our truly making a contribution. Finally, I dedicate my own efforts in the area of Ordering Biological Development to a great scientist, Dr. Walter Orr Roberts, who died one week ago. It was his work, beginning years ago and continuing to his death, that led to the world’s recognizing the urgency of balancing the earth’s carbon cycle. It was his friendship that has led me to commit a large part of my scientific career to that task.
Notes 1, BasicPaperon “Islamic Principlesfor the Conservation of the Natural Environment,” by Dr. Abou Bakr Ahmed Ba Kader, Dr. Abdul Latif Tawfik El Shirazy Al Sabbagh, Dr. Mohamed Al Sayyed Al Glenid and Dr. Moue1 Yousef SamarraiIzzden, 1409H (1989 AD), published by Meteorology and Environmental Protection Administration, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources,Arriyadh. 2. Entropy, into the Greenhouse World, by Jeremy Rifkin, 1409H (1989 AD), Bantam Books, New York. 3. The New Realities, by Peter Drucker, 1409H (1989 AD), Harper & Row, New York. 4. Synergetic Press,London.
About the Author Carl N. Hodges is Director of the Environmental Research Laboratory in Tucson, Arizona. Controlled-environment agriculture facilities have been established under ERL direction in Mexico, Iran, Abu Dhabi, and the U.S., and have developed such evolutionary products as the penaeid shrimp in Mexico and salt-tolerant plants (halophytes) in the Middle East. ERL worked with the Walt Disney “imagineers” in development of the Epcot Center, and is currently involved in the Biosphere II project. Mr. Hodges serves on numerous national and international ecological boards and councils, and is on the Editorial Board of JSBS.
Environmental Technologies: Ordering Biological Development Carl N. Hodges
The participants in this conference, and the readers of this paper, are undoubtedly familiar, to a great degree, with the current status of the environment of our home: the earth. Both sponsoring organizations, the Meteorology and Environmental Protection Administration of Saudi Arabia (MEPA) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), have published extensively on the subject. Our biosphere, the living environment that supports us all, has serious problems, and we humans are mainly responsible. There are 385,000 more of us every day-a new population equivalent to that of Arriyadh every four days. And we do not live “gently” on the earth. The five billion of us require air, water, food, energy, housing and amenities, and as we have developed the earth to provide them, we have created problems. That the problems exist and are serious is the bad news. That we are recognizing them, and by meetings such as this increasing our determination and joint abilities to solve the problems, is the good news. A valuable contribution to our discussions is provided by those who have defined the magnitude of our challenge-and here I rely largely on United Nations data. We have grown from three billion to five billion in less than fifty years, and in that time we have moved to the cities. Fifty years ago, only one-fourth of us lived in cities. Now it is almost one-half and increasing. As we have grown in numbers, our degree of urbanization and industrialization has grown even faster than our numbers. Only forty years ago, as a result of our use of energy, we put 6,000 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the air per year. Today we put more than 25,000 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the air. We have forced the carbon cycle of the earth’s atmosphere out of balance. The green plants can no longer take the carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere (and produce our oxygen) as fast as we humans put carbon dioxide in. And, to make matters worse, we are reducing the number of plants on the earth working to bring things into balance. We destroy twelve million hectares of tropical rain forest every year (and with that Carl N. Hodges, Journal
of Social
ISSN: 0140-1750
Director,
Environmental
and Biological
Structures
Research Lab, University 13(2):83-92.
of Arizona,
Tucson Copyright 0 1990 by JAI F’ms. Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.
83
a4 -
CARL N. HODGES
we destroy its great genetic diversity). We also lose an equal amount of agricultural land by poor cultivation practices, overuse, erosion and drought. The result is that the carbon dioxide of the atmosphere is increasing at such a rate that, if we continue as we are now, it will double by 1450H (2030 AD). And, since carbon dioxide in the atmosphere acts as a “heat trap” for the earth, that increase will result in a drastic warming of the earth, possibly by as much as 1.5 to 4.5 degrees Celsius. Such an increase would have disastrous results in terms of reduced rainfall in many areas, increasing desertification, and possibly a dramatic increase in the level of the sea, which would flood many areas of the world. A global warming of 4.5 degrees in only four to five decades would exceed the entire rise in temperature since the last ice age-and we humans will have caused it. In the paper “Islamic Principles for the Conservation of the Natural Environment”‘, of which MEPA was a co-sponsor, the “Glorious Q&an” is quoted. God says, “... and produced therein all kinds of things in due balance.” I would propose that, with the gift of intelligence that we have been given, we take re-establishing “balance” in our environment as the theme of our conference report, as our challenge as participants, and as our responsibility to present and future generations. As I try to think constructively about what to do in this area, both as an individual and as a part of the culture and organizations to which I belong, I find a “context setting” book, Entropy, into the Greenhouse World2, by the American environmentalist, Jeremy Rifkin, to be particularly helpful. Rifkin, from my perception, is an extreme pessimist. Maybe because of that he can focus so precisely on the negatives of human activities and delineate them for us. He does that well, and I recommend his book for your library for the completeness of his list of our environmental challenges. More importantly, I recommend Rifkin for thinking about his principal thesis; that is, that we live in a world of decreasing order (and resources) because of the thermodynamic reality that every time we humans do anything, we use up resources. And, as there are more and more of us, we use more and more resources. Thus the world is “running down,” and our only reality, according to Rifkin, is to make the best of a declining “quality of life,” at least as quality is defined by our industrialized societies. Here, to an extent, I disagree with Mr. Rifkin. Certainly a value of “quality of life” based on materialism is wanting, and that is well addressed in “Islamic Principles for the Conservation of the Natural Environment.” But, humans do need “necessities” to support the full dimensions of our life. And, it is my firm belief that it is an imbalance in our current focus on development, as we produce those necessities, that has led to the imbalance in our environment. Thus this seminar, “Environment and Development in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,” is exactly where we-should be. We need industrial development. We need to do it well, and that requires the application of intelligence, because, by definition, industrial activity processes resources, reduces their availability in nature, and creates waste (pollution). Here Bifkin is correct; there is no way around that. The laws of thermodynamics prevail. The increase in non-availability of material and energy is defined as an increase in disorder, or physicists use the vocabulary “an increase in entropy. ” An increase in entropy means that the system is “running down.” But, even if we are running down in terms of using up energy and
Environmental
Technologies: Ordering
Biological
Development
-
85
materials, we can minimize pollution with the best possible processes, and we can then handle that pollution such that it has minimum impact on the environment. Further, at the same time we focus on industrial development (as we should), we must balance that with an equal focus on biological development-not just biological protection-if we want to reverse the “running down.” It is life itself that determines our environment. Before there was plant life on earth, our atmosphere was high in carbon dioxide and low in oxygen. But plants processed the carbon dioxide into carbohydrates and oxygen (food to eat and air to breathe). The clouds over the rain forest that benefit the trees with shade and rain are partly there because of the trees themselves transpiring water into the atmosphere. The British scientist, James Lovelock, developed his Gaia hypothesis from studying the atmosphere of other planets and how different they are from the unique atmosphere of earth. Our earth’s plants make oxygen, animals use oxygen and eat plants. Animals give off nutrients and carbon dioxide that, in turn, are used by plants. We do not understand the many intricacies of the interactions, but our atmosphere is “balanced” by life itself. (And God says, “There is not a thing but celebrates His praise, and yet ye understand not how they declare its glory!” ‘) Now, our own human life, primarily through our actions and industrialization, is more and more deteriorating of our environment. Industrialization has the effect, if looked at from its total environmental impact, of reducing the availability of energy and resources, and increasing disorder. That is, as a product is made, the product itself is organized, but the energy and resources used to make it are no longer available, and waste (pollution) has been created. Entropy has increased. On the other hand, a biological plant (whether a date tree, a wheat plant or a flower) uses sunshine coming to us from outside the earth to increase order. The plant takes carbon from the atmosphere and concentrates it as carbohydrates, and it takes nutrients dispersed in the soil and concentrates them in its tissue. And the plant can even take what might be thought of as “pollutants” from the air and soil as nutrients, if we do not push the plant’s environment too far out of balance. Because of the activity of plants using energy from the sun, entropy from the standpoint of the earth itself has decreased. Order has increased, and we have greatly benefited. Unfortunately, as we have moved to the cities, we have neglected the balance of biology. Our agriculture in many countries of the world has made great progress in terms of productivity-but often at the expense of balance. My own country of the United States of America has a wonderfully productive agricultural system. It takes only two American farmers to feed 100 Americans and still have some food for export to the rest of the world. That has “freed” us non-farmers for many activities, many of them associated with industrialization. Tragically, for future generations, however, our agriculture does not decrease entropy (disorder) as it might-and should. It is estimated that American farmers use as much as ten calories of fossil fuel energy to produce one calorie of food energy. We do not recycle nutrients to the extent that we should. The U.S. loses over a billion tons of top soil to erosion every year. One estimate is that one-third of our top soil is now lost. Like those of us at this conference, we are recognizing our problems. The challenges are great. The world in the future, to the extent possible for every area, must have a productive,
86 -
CARL N. HODGES
“ordering” biological activity to balance development if future generations are to have the environment necessary for humanity’s existence and joy. To provide that Ordering Biological Development is a great challenge and a great opportunity. It will require application of all the sciences, even the development of new sciences, and it will require great cooperation between individuals, organizations and nations. The dean of American business books, Peter Drucker, in his latest publication, The New Realities3, talks about the requirement for transnational ecology. This audience knows, of course, that it is planetary ecology that we need, but we will have to take many paths and intermediate steps to that “reality” as we truly integrate ecological requirements and development. Space Biospheres Ventures, the group that is developing Biosphere II, uses the word “ecotechnics,” the combination of ecology and technology. I recommend their literature4 for a review of the potential of learning to be better stewards of our biosphere, the earth, by developing research biospheres, and for the new science they practice, biospherics. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a blessed country. You have great quantities of stored energy in the form of fossil fuel for industrial development. You also have great quantities of “renewable” solar energy, the primary energy source for the balance to industrial development -that is, Ordering Biological Development. Numbers are interesting and can give us a basis for future discussions (probably mostly in follow-ups to this seminar), even if at the early stages they are only approximations. If the Kingdom exports 1,500 million barrels of oil per year (at 85 percent carbon), then wherever in the world that oil is used, approximately 200 million tons of carbon are released to the atmosphere. (This is about 2.6 percent of the total). On a worldwide basis, the earth is currently recycling about half the carbon put into the atmosphere. The other half is accumulating in the atmosphere and contributing to the warming of the earth. Assume for a moment that, as part of a worldwide effort to “balance” the carbon cycle of the earth, Saudi Arabia wanted to recapture its exported carbon for reuse. Then it would need to establish an Organizing Biological Development to take 100 million tons of carbon from the atmosphere by photosynthesis and “fix” it into carbohydrates (plant material). It is important to recognize that this would be a contribution by Saudi Arabia to solving a worldwide problem that we all share; but if correctly done, it would also be developing an opportunity for Saudi Arabia. The carbohydrates (farm products) produced have value; in some cases greater value per unit than the carbon in the form of oil. Research has been done on converting oil directly to food. The removal of carbon from the atmosphere by photosynthesis does exactly this plus “captures” some solar energy in the process. For us to create an Organizing Biological Development, we must account for all the inputs and outputs of our efforts and not make the mistake of creating a biological activity that requires more energy than it L‘captures” from sunshine. We must also consider the other inputs for photosynthesis, water and nutrients. This paper will be much too long if I develop all the logic from basic consideration, so let me jump to my first suggested specific environmental technology for Saudi Arabia: seawater-irrigated agriculture at the desert coast of the Kingdom. On the earth, only one-half of one percent of the water is liquid fresh water. The other 99.5 percent is in the ice caps or in the oceans. Two-thirds of the earth is covered with seawater. In human terms, seawater is essentially an infinite resource. The Kingdom has
Environmental
Technologies: Ordering
Biological
Development
-
87
access to that resource on two coasts. If it were to develop 15 million hectares of farmlands on those coasts (and there are now crops that will grow productively on pure seawater), it would “balance” or bring back to the Kingdom the “imbalance” carbon it is exporting. Those 15 million hectares would be 55 percent of the agricultural land now being lost in the world every year. Assuming that the seawater farming only replaced the per unit value of that land, then the 15 million hectares would yield 12 billion dollars in value to the .Kingdom. But, in reality, the potential value of crops from seawater irrigation is much greater, and in the future, with correct Ordering Biological Development of that farmland, the value could be several times higher than the 12 billion dollars per year. And that would be in terms of today’s economic systems that do not take into account true environmental cost-or more importantly, in this case, environmental benefits. Figure 1 shows an important aspect to the “ordering” done by seawater-based farming for us. Irrigation with seawater returns nutrients from the sea to the land on a large scale for the first time as the plants remove nutrients from the water for their growth. We, of course, do that on a small scale every time we eat a fish from the sea and our wastes go to the land. Nutrients taken back from the sea by seawater agriculture can be transported to the interior of the country for environmental benefit there. We have heard about the deterioration of the rangelands in the Kingdom. Perhaps by bringing fodder from the seashore for supplemental feed and correct management of grazing animals we can “rebuild” the rangelands for their own sake and for the positive benefit to the total environment. Grasslands remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and cool and clean the air.
@
DISORDER
INCREASING
DEVELOPMENT
@
ORDERING
BIOLOGICAL
DEVELOPMENT
Figure I.
(ENTROPY
(ORD)
INCREASING)
(ENTROPY
DECREASING)
Ordering biological development by sea-water-basedagriculture
88 -
CARL N. HODGES
Further, if we add seawater-based aquaculture (the growing of fish, shrimp and other marine products) to the system, we can increase the economic potential, increase the “ordering,” and increase the flow of those ordered products to the interior of the country. Figure 2 shows the specific “balancing” with one of the many industrialized cities vi: which the Kingdom is linked in the carbon cycle. The drawing could as well have been for 2 European, American, or any city of the world. We have only one atmosphere, and it links LIE all together. In the future, as oil reserves decline and the price of oil increases (as it should ant must), we can switch from exclusively petrochemical-based industries to partially biochemically-based. The carbohydrates from seawater farms will provide industrial feedstock in the future. When that happens, the carbon cycle of the atmosphere can be balanced on an annua basis. For the immediate future, however, seawater farms need to store carbon in addition tc providing food for humans and animals that quickly re-enters the atmosphere as carbor dioxide. That can be done. The current best crop for seawater irrigation is the halophyte crop SOS-7 (Salicomia Oil Seed, seventh year of selection) (see Table 1). SOS-7 produce: approximately 20 metric tons per hectare of biomass. Of that, about 10 percent is a seec which contains 30 percent high-quality vegetable oil for human consumption and 70 percen high-protein meal for human and animal food. The seed will be consumed, as will part of the
Figure 2.
Example city balance of the carbon cycle.
Environmental
TABLE
1. Production
Technologies: Ordering
Data and Analysis
Summary
of Field Producrion
Biological Development
of Halophyte
Total Biomass Straw Salt (ash) Oilseed Oil Meal
Data Percent of total
20.0 10.8 7.2 2.0 0.6 1.4 Characteristics
of Halophyte
89
(SOS-7) Oil
MTIHA
Biomass
-
100 54 36 10 3 7 (SOS-7)
Oil
The physical properties of the oil demonstrate that this is an excellent quality vegetable oil. The iodine value of 156 may appear to be low for a high 18:2 oil (oil high in linoleic acid), but this can also be true for safflower oil, another high 18:2 oil. This oil can substitute for oils with 18:2 contents of 50 to 55 percent, such as soybean and cottonseed oil. The 18:l (oleic acid) content of this halophyte oil is similar to that of cottonseed, soybean and palm kernel oil. The chlorophyll content at 2.2 ppm is high compared to (for example) corn oil. A second bleaching step removes the residual chlorophyll and gives a Lovibond color of lOY10.8R; thus it should present no problem on a commercial scale. Without the second bleaching, the visual appearance of the color is similar to that of olive oil. The oil is similar to soybean oil in its storage characteristics. It can easily be partially hydrogenated to lower its degree of unsaturation for improved (extended) shelf life. Standard tests conducted at the University of Arizona Nutrition and Food Science Department indicate that this oil easily substitutes for safflower oil or butter in recipes for sauces, salad dressings, bread, pie crust, etc. The characteristics of SOS-7 vegetable oil have been determined by the Archer Daniels Midland Co. (ADM) of Decatur, Illinois, and analyzed separately by ERL’s analytical laboratory. The various physical properties are summarized for the processed oil (i.e., refined, bleached and deodorized). The samples processed by ADM were from 1984 harvests. The ERL samples are composite values from harvests over the last four years. Physical
a.
Moisture
and volatile
b.
Soap
c.
Free fatty
d.
Specific
e.
Saponification
f.
Iodine
g.
Unsaponifiable
h.
Color:
i.
Flavor
j.
Chlorophyll
acids
matter
(as oleic)
gravity value
value matter
photometric Lovibond
’
Properties ADM
ERL
0.10%
0.12%
3.0 ppm
ND*
0.03%
0.05%
ND
0.9223 (21125” C)
ND
182-191mg K0FB.g oil
156
ND
ND
0.8%
ND 15Y/0.8R
1.18 in progress
bland
bland to nutty
2.2 ppm
2.7 ppm
90
-
CARL N. HODGES TABLE
1. Production
Data and Analysis Physical
of Halophyte
(SOS-7) Oil Conrinued
Properties ALIM
ERL
3.9
ND
6.9%
2.3% 14.1% 73.1% 2.4% 1.2%
7.6% 2.8% 13.2% 73.6% 2.1% 0.7%
ND
475” F
o. Cold test
ND
passes
o. Neutral oil
98.9%
98.2%
k. Peroxide 1. Fatty acid profile:
m. Smoke point
palmitic stearic oleic linoleic linolenic other
*ND = Not Determined
“straw.” However, part of the straw will be stored as we build topsoil by recycling it to the earth (instead of destroying topsoil as is often the case), and part of it will be used as a “wood” for building material. Perhaps storing carbon in the walls of much-needed housing for our increasing numbers will be one of the best uses. A shrimp farm is the “front end” of one SOS-7 farm. This has the attractive feature of the nutrients from the waste of the shrimp becoming part of the nutrient source for the plants, and some of the product of the plants being part of the food for the shrimp. I do not propose that Saudi Arabia plan to irrigate 15 million hectares of land with seawater. That may be far too much. Perhaps the Kingdom’s role is to be an example for the world and develop only the area for the Kingdom’s maximum economic benefit. I am sure that will be large, but how large will depend on many factors. What is the future of farms irrigated with fresh water? How much seawater-irrigated area would assure food selfsufficiency? How will the world climate change even if we make our best efforts? What is the relative value of farms in the Kingdom compared to seawater-inigated farms perhaps desperately needed in poor countries? And so on. But, the task I was given for my paper was to “discuss some environmental technologies, ’ ’ and I have talked about only one in specific: seawater-based agriculture. However, with that as my principal example and with the contribution to our vocabulary of Ordering Biological Development, I hope I have set the stage for some creative future reasoning together. There are many technologies that the Kingdom is pursuing that are certainly environmental. The Royal Commission receiving the Sasakawa Environmental Award for Jubail and Yanbu is a striking example. You are in many cases minimizing pollution and then cleaning up what pollution exists with the best available techniques. Nevertheless, I would suggest that you complement that success with increased attention to Ordering Biological Development in addition to biological protection. I will give two more examples from my own laboratory’s work -- “organic agriculture” and biological air purification.
Environmental
Technologies: Ordering
Biological
Development
-
91
I am sure that most of you are familiar with the strong movement around the world toward what is termed “organic agriculture.” This usually means minimizing outside inputs of energy and material (increasing the potential for “ordering”) and improving the “healthfulness” of the products by reduction, or in many cases elimination, of pesticides and other potentially harmful chemicals. I do not believe that our world agriculture can quickly convert to “organic,” but we can work in that direction. We can reward the farmer who moves toward an “ordering” system, the one who builds soils instead of destroying them and who gives us the most healthy products possible within the constraints of how he or she must operate until we can give the farmer better “ecotechnologies.” In my laboratory’s work, we have produced a broad spectrum of food crops with no pesticides and essentially complete recycling of nutrients. Much of the results of that work now can be applied profitably on a commercial scale. Finally, to return to the idea of biology organizing waste (pollution) for us. I am sure we are all familiar with the use of treated wastewater for irrigation. The nutrients from that water are organized by the plants into the valuable product of the plant tissue. Using that same perspective, we believe that waste pollution in the air can be “organized” for us by biological systems if we enhance (develop) their capability. We do this with what we term a “Soil Bed Air Purifier.” This comes from our work with the scientists of Biosphere II. There, since the atmosphere within it is totally “closed in,” we must make sure that the air is continuously purified of any possible pollutants. These could be out-gassing from paints, ethylene from ripening tomatos, or many other compounds that in the earth’s biosphere would not be a problem because of the great volume of our atmosphere, but in the limited volume of Biosphere II are of concern. To avoid any problems, the air in Biosphere II is mechanically circulated through soil, and the biology cleans it for us. The soil absorbs some contaminants, microbes consume others, and plants use the microbes’ products for nutrients. A farmer, or anyone, who improves the soil is helping to clean the air. I believe that work to date on Soil Bed Air Purification merits the Kingdom looking into adding it as an additional technology to air pollution abatement efforts. This approach would entail the encouragement of even greater plant growth in the cities and industrial areas, and the evaluation of mechanically adding Soil Bed Air Purifier Systems where pollution is concentrated (such as along highways). Well, this paper is much longer than I intended. I want to thank MEPA and UNDP. I congratulate you on organizing this seminar. I hope my thoughts and a few numbers on Ordering Biological Development, as a contribution to balance, have been helpful. Thinking again of the MEPA pamphlet quoting the “Glorious Qur’an”: “On Doomsday, if anyone has a palm shoot in hand, he should plant it.” Looking around the Kingdom, I am pleased to say, I see planting continuously in process, and I see the potential for much much more.
This paper was prepared for the Seminar on “Environment and Development in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,” 21-23 Shaaban 1410 (18-20 March 1990), Tuwaiq Palace, Havy Ass&rat, Arriyadh; sponsored by the Meteorology and Environmental Protection Administration of Saudi Arabia (MEPA) and the United Nations Development Program (UNDP).
Acknowledgments:
92
-
CARL N. HODGES
First I would like to express my appreciation to Dr. Abdulbar Al-Gain of MEPA and Mr. Ahmad Namek of UNDP for this opportunity to be with you today. This discussion paper presents the work of many people, the entire staff of the Environmental Research Laboratory (ERL) of the University of Arizona, and particularly the team working on the specifics of applications of our research to the Kingdom: Dr. Don Baumgartner, Mr. Neal Hicks, Dr. Edward Glenn, Dr. James Riley, Dr. Robert Frye, Mr. George Mignon, Mr. Dan Parker and Mr. Steve Carter. Critical to our efforts has been the contribution of Ing. Carlos Mota and his people, who have produced the magnificent seawaterirrigated crops in Mexico. The creative thinking and developments of Space Biospheres Ventures, led by Margret Augustine, are vitally important to the future of the environment of our earth. And the interface to commercial applications for the work of ERL provided by the Planetary Design Corporation and its Chairman, Mr. William Wood Prince, is essential to our truly making a contribution. Finally, I dedicate my own efforts in the area of Ordering Biological Development to a great scientist, Dr. Walter Orr Roberts, who died one week ago. It was his work, beginning years ago and continuing to his death, that led to the world’s recognizing the urgency of balancing the earth’s carbon cycle. It was his friendship that has led me to commit a large part of my scientific career to that task.
Notes 1, BasicPaperon “Islamic Principlesfor the Conservation of the Natural Environment,” by Dr. Abou Bakr Ahmed Ba Kader, Dr. Abdul Latif Tawfik El Shirazy Al Sabbagh, Dr. Mohamed Al Sayyed Al Glenid and Dr. Moue1 Yousef SamarraiIzzden, 1409H (1989 AD), published by Meteorology and Environmental Protection Administration, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources,Arriyadh. 2. Entropy, into the Greenhouse World, by Jeremy Rifkin, 1409H (1989 AD), Bantam Books, New York. 3. The New Realities, by Peter Drucker, 1409H (1989 AD), Harper & Row, New York. 4. Synergetic Press,London.
About the Author Carl N. Hodges is Director of the Environmental Research Laboratory in Tucson, Arizona. Controlled-environment agriculture facilities have been established under ERL direction in Mexico, Iran, Abu Dhabi, and the U.S., and have developed such evolutionary products as the penaeid shrimp in Mexico and salt-tolerant plants (halophytes) in the Middle East. ERL worked with the Walt Disney “imagineers” in development of the Epcot Center, and is currently involved in the Biosphere II project. Mr. Hodges serves on numerous national and international ecological boards and councils, and is on the Editorial Board of JSBS.