Our Future Uncompromised

Science to stop social-economic collapse

In democracy electorates rule, not politicians; to effectively do so the public must be informed of the following science so they will be able to demand the actions required to stop trends which will inevitably result in social-economic collapse:

As Albert Einstein might have said –

1. The Sustainable Development Goals and Nationally Determined Contributions to stop climate change were “discovered” by politicians, they do not “obey the laws of nature” and thus ensure that “man will not survive”.[1]

2. There is no global government, to “survive” – to develop sustainably including holding global warming to 1.5°C / 2°C – 197 nations’ natural resource consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, and the reductions required to stay within science limits must be prominently publically known, but they are not.[2]

3. The astonishing scientific evidence is that the next 35 years of natural resource extractions and fossil fuel emissions will equal the last 300,000, the entire time of our H. sapiens species – and it won’t stop there, on these trends social-economic collapse is inevitable.[3]

4. To stop collapse, UN Very High Developed, the best educated-wealthiest-healthiest nations who set the standards for humanity must lead, but do not; lesser developed cannot.[4]

Please view and urgently communicate to citizens so they will be able to act:

COP25OFUstatement11Dec2019.mp4
6 minute COP25 video with ‘future generation’ scientists
the ONLY time in 50 years of environmental conferences that 197 nations’ natural resource consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, and the reductions required
to stay within science limits have been presented.

Contact: Michael Wadleigh, Birgit van Munster, +44 7538 416 407 OurFutureUncompromised@gmail.com @closedmassorg


Science – our future uncompromised – statement

As Albert Einstein might have said,

Man will not survive, unless the laws of man obey the laws of nature.

But they do not.

It is as if millions demonstrating around the world starting with the first Earth Day 50 years ago, and all United Nation environment conferences of the last half-century – including this Climate Conference – never happened:

• Global natural resource extraction – destruction of nature – has nearly quadrupled to 97 billion tonnes this year, increasing 2.5% per year.[5]

• The global warming effect of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations has more than doubled;[6] greenhouse emissions are now 56 billion tonnes CO2eq per year,[7] increasing 1.3% per year – and 85% of the current 1.1°C global warming happened in the last 50 years.[8] [9]

• Most astonishingly, the scientific evidence is that the next 35 years of natural resource extractions and fossil fuel emissions will equal the last 300,000 years, the entire time of our H. sapiens species – and it won’t stop there – at these trends social-economic collapse is inevitable.[3]

What is required for sustainable development including holding global warming to 2˚C / 1.5˚C is international agreement by 197 nations – based on physical reality science, on responsibility and capability, not on intentions and ambitions.

First, the internationally agreed Sustainable Development Objective is to “meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”, for natural resources – nature – from which all humans, all humanity’s products, and all life are made.[10]

The International Resource Panel – the global science authority on natural resources ¬concluded that for sustainable development, resource extraction must be limited to 7 tonnes per capita per year by 2050.[11]

Sweden, for example, a Very High Developed nation currently consumes 24 tonnes of resources per person per year – 3.5 times over the 2050 limit – increasing 1.6% per year.[12] To stay within the IRP science limit Sweden should reduce consumption 3.7% per year now by LAW, increasing with inaction.

Second, the internationally agreed Climate Objective is to “stabilize atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system”,[13] hold global warming to well below 2˚C, preferably 1.5˚C.[14]

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – the global science authority on climate change – concluded that the emissions limit remaining on 1 January 2019 was 900 billion tonnes CO2 or 117 tonnes CO2 per capita for 2˚C, and 245 billion tonnes CO2 or 32 tonnes CO2 per capita for 1.5˚C.[15]

Sweden, for example, currently emits 7 tonnes CO2 per capita per year, decreasing only 0.4% per year.[16] To avoid exceeding the IPCC science limits, Sweden should reduce CO2 emissions 5.9% per year for 2˚C, and 20.9% for 1.5˚C per year now by LAW, increasing with inaction.

In stunning contrast Tanzania for example, a typical Low Developed nation can increase resource consumption 5%, and increase CO2 emissions 3% per year for 2˚C and 1% and for 1.5˚C per year without exceeding its limit.[17]

Note that these actions are now, not by some time in the future, and they are different for each nation, not ‘one-global-action-fits-all’.

To achieve these reductions requires laws. Earth is a closed mass system, sunlight enters but there are no meaningful material imports or exports and no human emigrations to other celestial bodies – and none are probable in any century soon, perhaps ever. Therefore LAWS are required that are based on closed mass science:

• Change from quantity to quality now by law;

• Extract the absolutely fewest possible natural resources;

• Make only products that are the very best, that last the longest, are shared the most, are reparable and cyclical;

• Reduce human population.

Saving the future can be painless. Products are by far the principal cause of destruction of nature and must be severely reduced. The great good news is that scientists – including the best psychologists and sociologists at for example Facebook, Google, Amazon – know that for our 300,000 year old H. sapiens species, happiness is first humans, activities and nature, NOT products. The huge reduction in global quantities to few quality products – the best that last the longest and are shared the most – can be painless.

Finally as to cost – the price of victory in war can be 50% of gross domestic product.[18] However to “stop collapse of our societies” rich nations like our own typically find it “credible” to spend a maximum of 1-2% of GDP – which is equal to the cost of one Starbuck cup of coffee per person per day![19]

If it costs 10% of GDP – fairly distributed – to “Save the Future” the question for all children may be, “How much do you love me mom and dad”, and for politicians to parents, ‘How much do you love your children”.

Therefore we urgently demand that parents, voters – who in democracy are the rulers – demand that politicians enact national laws now to reduce consumption and emissions to the level required by science, spending 10% of GDP to Save the Future.

Our own Very High Developed nations the best educated-wealthiest-healthiest have the greatest responsibility, capability and set the example which humanity follows – they must lead, it is not possible for less developed nations to do so.

To stop imminent social-economic collapse and for another 5,000 years of civilizations Einstein might have said,

The laws of 197 sovereign nations – led by Very High Developed – must obey the laws of nature, or man, future generations, will not survive.

This statement is by OurFutureUncompromised.org where all information can be found.

Contact: Michael Wadleigh, Birgit van Munster, +44 7538 416 407 OurFutureUncompromised@gmail.com @closedmassorg



[1] Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are “wanted development” which were determined by politicians consulting millions of citizens, not scientists; even if achieved SDGs will not secure future generations by meaningfully reducing destruction of nature from which all humans, products and life are made. Voluntary Nationally Determined Contributions may “limit” global warming to 4˚C, but not to the current 1˚C which many scientists conclude is already “dangerous interference”.

[2] In 50 years of UN environmental conferences Our Future Uncompromised COP25 was the only time that 197 national Party’s natural resource extractions, greenhouse gas emissions and the reductions required to stay within science limits have been presented; a likely reason is opposition by Very High Developed nations who finance the UN and do not find it in their interest for this national science data to be known.

[3] Data sources: Fisher-Kowalski M et al, (2014): A socio-metabolic reading of the Anthropocene: modes of subsistence, population size and human impact on Earth; World Population Prospects (2017): medium estimate; Krausmann F. (2011): Social Ecology Working Paper 131; Krausmann, F et al. (2018): From resource extraction to outflows of wastes and emissions: The socioeconomic metabolism of the global economy, 1900-2015 online dataset; UN Environment International Resource Panel Global Material Flows Database.

[4] UNDP, UNEP, World Bank, etc. data show that UN Very High Developed set the standards – including health, education, income, wealth, natural resource consumption, GHG emissions – which are followed by 7.7 billion humans, there is no meaningful “2nd” or “3rd Way” of development.

[5] United Nations Environment, International Resource Panel (IRP), Global Material Flows Database.

[6] Butler, J.H. and S.A. Montzka (2019): The NOAA Annual Greenhouse Gas Index (AGGI).

[7] PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (2019): Trends in Global CO2 and Total Greenhouse Gas emissions.

[8] NASA GISS (2019): Global Annual Mean Surface Air Temperature Change 1880 – present.

[9] World Meteorological Organization (2019): Provisional Statement on the State of the Global Climate in 2019.

[10] World Commission on Environment and Development (1987): Our Common Future.

[11] United Nations Environment, International Resource Panel (2014): Managing and conserving the natural resource base for sustained economic and social development.

[12] United Nations Environment, International Resource Panel (IRP), Global Material Flows Database, Material Footprint per capita.

[13] United Nations (1992): United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Article 2.

[14] United nations (2015): United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Paris Agreement.

[15] The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2018): Special Report, Global warming of 1.5˚C. (67% probability, accounting for earth system feedbacks (100 GtCO2), relying on very rapid reduction of non-CO2 forces, with no temperature overshoot and no negative emissions, 88% allocated for combustion of fossil fuels and industry.)

[16] Le Quéré et al. (2018): Global Carbon Project, global budget v1.0.

[17] Annual reductions / increases are calculated by responsibility, with international and intergenerational equity (2019-2100). If countries have not yet reached zero emissions by 2100, their remaining limit (budget) is at least 20 years of 2100 emissions.

[18] UK Public Spending, complied by Christopher Chantril

[19] Committee on Climate Change (2019) Net Zero, the UK’s Contribution to Stopping Global Warming; UK Economic Accounts Dataset (2019)