Reader (and friend) Abra pointed out this excerpt from "Bugs in the Arroyo" by Steven Gould. The story has a very interesting form of apocalypse: metal eating bugs. I get the impression they might be some kind of self-replicating machine gone wild. It reminds me of Ray Bradbury's short story "A Piece of Wood," where a man discovers a compound that quickly turns metal into rust.
A metal-free future would be a particularly difficult one. Certain things like saws would be difficult, if not impossible to make. Plows and axes are possible with other materials, but inferior. There would be no guns or bullets, or even nails. Harnessing electricity would be basically impossible. On the other hand, glass has a very sharp edge even if it doesn't hold very long, and some types of wood are as strong as some metals. I suspect that a culture prepared for an event like that might be able to develop some strong plastics (or as mentioned in the story, fiberglass) to replace certain metal items, but they'd still be locked into a permanent metal-free existence.
I'm sure these aren't the only two examples of metal-free futures, or ones where certain resources are "off-limits." If you can think of more, let me know in the comments.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Monday, April 27, 2009
Swine Flu
Swine Flu has been all over the news the last couple of days. Lots of people are using the word pandemic. Is this the big one? Personally, I doubt it. Governments got very scared about SARS and Bird Flu in the last few years, so I think the appropriate agencies are relatively well prepared for this.
Just a word of advice - when it comes to science and medicine, don't listen to your friends. They don't know anything (unless they're, you know, doctors and scientists in appropriate fields). Find authoritative sources. The Center for Disease Control, scientific websites like New Scientist and Nature and professional health-focused sites like WebMD are a better source of information than that guy you talk to on the bus. Even the usually terrible local evening news is slightly better. Misinformation is very dangerous during an emergency.
So, after all that let's get all worked up. This is all hypothetical. What would an apocalyptic swine flu pandemic look like?
If we look at a real pandemic like the 1918 Spanish flu, which killed about 100 million people, it's easy to see that a disease on that scale isn't really apocalyptic in nature. The Spanish flu killed between 2.5-5% of the human population. To be apocalyptic it would have to go way beyond that and kill maybe 25% or more, like the Black Death did in 14th century Europe.
For the sake of argument, let's assume that it has high lethality, is resistant to treatment, spreads easily and ultimately kills about 25% of the population, spread around evenly. Since it was caught after quite a few deaths in Mexico, and there are known cases in the US, it's a safe bet it has spread to other locations via major travel hubs and large cities - LA, NYC, London, Paris, Hong Kong, Beijing, etc... If things go well any infected people will be quickly identified and isolated and the spread of the disease halted in that area. If they don't go well once these major travel hubs are thoroughly infected they will be next to impossible to lock down. The disease will spread out to smaller cities and towns as panicked people head away from the bigger cities.
Once the disease really starts to infect large numbers of people and the authorities try to restrict travel we can expect to see problems with resources. I think this is especially true of places like the US and Europe, where there are not necessarily a lot of local resources of particular types because it's cheaper to centralize and ship long distances. For example, car manufacturers might have a hard time getting steel because their trains are restricted or there are too many sick engineers. Certain goods will become very hard to find, for instance tropical fruits in the upper midwest US. Obviously the authorities will try to keep medicine and necessities in good supply, and if nothing else happens to make it worse, the effects of the pandemic will probably end somewhere around there. Lots of people dead, but little else truly impacted. Critical infrastructure and government will likely remain in place and functional.
As long as the percentage of deaths doesn't go too high, there will be a shifting in people's focus. People involved with luxury items and non-essentials will shift to fill the gaps in more essential services. We might see a drop in dog groomers, florists and baristi and an increase in local farming and manufacturing jobs. Some other interesting fallout would be a wide-scale housing market upset, as so many vacant homes come on the market. You won't be able to sell your house because it's so easy to get a cheap vacant one. People who are renting currently will be able to cheaply move into their own houses and the rental market will be in big trouble.
For a few years after the pandemic I expect there will be a kind of resistance to large social gatherings, or even the use of public transportation. The car market may boom despite recent environmental concerns as people shy away from the close quarters of the bus and train. Telecommuting will become huge, first because it will let people work while ill without any risk to coworkers, and second because it will be necessary to recruit people from farther away if there are shortages in skilled workers locally.
The developing world is going to be hit much, much harder than the US and Europe. Medical supplies are already limited, and areas that are already experiencing war, famine or the AIDS epidemic may be all but wiped out. Places that loose too much of their population will see their basic infrastructure collapse, and the rest of the world will be ill-equiped to assist.
All in all, it would be a pretty scary and nasty event, but compared to the other big potential apocalypses (nuclear war, environmental collapse and zombies) this one is pretty mild. The human race will certainly survive and the world won't be a wretched hellscape for generations. There may even be some upshots. After facing a brush with apocalypse, people might start to think in longer terms than they did before and plan more effectively for this kind of thing. A drastic reduction in population will also cause a drastic (temporary) reduction in environmental impact which could slow the approach of some of the environmental dangers looming on the horizon.
All this is just my opinion, obviously. What do you think could happen during or after an apocalyptic plague? Let me know in the comments.
Just a word of advice - when it comes to science and medicine, don't listen to your friends. They don't know anything (unless they're, you know, doctors and scientists in appropriate fields). Find authoritative sources. The Center for Disease Control, scientific websites like New Scientist and Nature and professional health-focused sites like WebMD are a better source of information than that guy you talk to on the bus. Even the usually terrible local evening news is slightly better. Misinformation is very dangerous during an emergency.
So, after all that let's get all worked up. This is all hypothetical. What would an apocalyptic swine flu pandemic look like?
If we look at a real pandemic like the 1918 Spanish flu, which killed about 100 million people, it's easy to see that a disease on that scale isn't really apocalyptic in nature. The Spanish flu killed between 2.5-5% of the human population. To be apocalyptic it would have to go way beyond that and kill maybe 25% or more, like the Black Death did in 14th century Europe.
For the sake of argument, let's assume that it has high lethality, is resistant to treatment, spreads easily and ultimately kills about 25% of the population, spread around evenly. Since it was caught after quite a few deaths in Mexico, and there are known cases in the US, it's a safe bet it has spread to other locations via major travel hubs and large cities - LA, NYC, London, Paris, Hong Kong, Beijing, etc... If things go well any infected people will be quickly identified and isolated and the spread of the disease halted in that area. If they don't go well once these major travel hubs are thoroughly infected they will be next to impossible to lock down. The disease will spread out to smaller cities and towns as panicked people head away from the bigger cities.
Once the disease really starts to infect large numbers of people and the authorities try to restrict travel we can expect to see problems with resources. I think this is especially true of places like the US and Europe, where there are not necessarily a lot of local resources of particular types because it's cheaper to centralize and ship long distances. For example, car manufacturers might have a hard time getting steel because their trains are restricted or there are too many sick engineers. Certain goods will become very hard to find, for instance tropical fruits in the upper midwest US. Obviously the authorities will try to keep medicine and necessities in good supply, and if nothing else happens to make it worse, the effects of the pandemic will probably end somewhere around there. Lots of people dead, but little else truly impacted. Critical infrastructure and government will likely remain in place and functional.
As long as the percentage of deaths doesn't go too high, there will be a shifting in people's focus. People involved with luxury items and non-essentials will shift to fill the gaps in more essential services. We might see a drop in dog groomers, florists and baristi and an increase in local farming and manufacturing jobs. Some other interesting fallout would be a wide-scale housing market upset, as so many vacant homes come on the market. You won't be able to sell your house because it's so easy to get a cheap vacant one. People who are renting currently will be able to cheaply move into their own houses and the rental market will be in big trouble.
For a few years after the pandemic I expect there will be a kind of resistance to large social gatherings, or even the use of public transportation. The car market may boom despite recent environmental concerns as people shy away from the close quarters of the bus and train. Telecommuting will become huge, first because it will let people work while ill without any risk to coworkers, and second because it will be necessary to recruit people from farther away if there are shortages in skilled workers locally.
The developing world is going to be hit much, much harder than the US and Europe. Medical supplies are already limited, and areas that are already experiencing war, famine or the AIDS epidemic may be all but wiped out. Places that loose too much of their population will see their basic infrastructure collapse, and the rest of the world will be ill-equiped to assist.
All in all, it would be a pretty scary and nasty event, but compared to the other big potential apocalypses (nuclear war, environmental collapse and zombies) this one is pretty mild. The human race will certainly survive and the world won't be a wretched hellscape for generations. There may even be some upshots. After facing a brush with apocalypse, people might start to think in longer terms than they did before and plan more effectively for this kind of thing. A drastic reduction in population will also cause a drastic (temporary) reduction in environmental impact which could slow the approach of some of the environmental dangers looming on the horizon.
All this is just my opinion, obviously. What do you think could happen during or after an apocalyptic plague? Let me know in the comments.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
ICA on FARK
The site got linked on FARK recently, so hello to all you FARKers. I just wanted to let you know I'm working on a longer post about Swine flu, and I'll be trying to incorporate the suggestions I've received into an update on the Bookshelf. Thanks for reading!
Friday, April 24, 2009
Geomagnetic Apocalypse
The Geomagnetic Apocalypse - And How to Stop It via Wired.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Apocalypse Then: [Wired's] Favorite World Expiration Dates
It looks better in the print magazine, but Wired has a rundown on their favorite potential apocalypse dates of the last 1000 years or so.
Apocalypse Then: Our Favorite World Expiration Dates via Wired
Apocalypse Then: Our Favorite World Expiration Dates via Wired
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Children are our future
Children are our future, and our children are thinking about an environmental apocalypse in their lifetime. One in three of kids surveyed were afraid the world will actually end in their lifetime, while over half said they think it will merely be an unpleasant place to live.
That's a good start, but I hope they're playing their video games.
Via Treehugger
That's a good start, but I hope they're playing their video games.
Via Treehugger
Forward thinking
Some forward-thinking individuals spent a whole lot of money making these 16' tall granite pillars with "instructions" on how to rebuild society after some kind of apocalypse. I think the instructions are well meaning and I agree with many of them, but they're really more like the 10 Commandments than real instructions. What I want to see is a 16' tall granite pillar covered with the basic principles of electronics or chemistry.American Stonehenge: Monumental Instructions for the Post-Apocalypse from Wired.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)