Towards a Circular Economy Towards a Circular Economy
Nature

Towards a Circular Economy

Paulina Grabowska
Reading
time 3 minutes

Currently, our needs exceed the regenerative potential of the Earth by over 70%. Waste is produced on such a scale that it changes the chemical composition of the Earth’s coating and the atmosphere. Soon, we will have depleted natural resources, and by 2080 there will be no fertile soil left. Therefore, we should focus on solutions that will allow us to utilize pollution and transform waste into ecological products.

For the past 10 years, I have been researching and designing such solutions. I am doing this because pollution is currently the least used resource on Earth. One such project is a city farm that transforms smog particles into fertilizer, produces solar energy and can act as a small power plant. A system of such farms can be placed in the windows or on the roofs of buildings. It is one of the solutions thanks to which cities can be treated on an equal footing with naturally fertile soils.

Increasingly, we also lack metals. Here, plants can help. In my designs of gardens and hydroponic farms, I utilize the natural properties of plants to extract heavy metals and rare earths from contaminated mining sites and waste storage tanks. For example, cabbage can mine lithium, and water hyacinth – copper. Thanks to my research, I know that we can also use carbon dioxide leftover from the burning of fossil fuels to produce concrete, food and energy.

Information

Breaking news! This is the first of your five free articles this month. You can get unlimited access to all our articles and audio content with our digital subscription.

Subscribe

What we should focus on right now is the gradual transition from a linear to circular economy. In such an economy, we will have to limit consumption because everything would be back in circulation. Under such conditions, it would be more energy-efficient to reduce consumption, rather than to reuse and recycle materials. This would also significantly extend the life of the products. For example, our technologically-advanced smartphones are made of metal, glass and plastic. Theoretically, they can exist for hundreds of years. If it wasn’t for planned obsolescence, we would be able to pass them on to our children, and then to our grandchildren and great-grandchildren. I think that if we rented equipment instead of buying new, it would become important for manufacturers to ensure that their products did not break down or expire. And if they did break – so that the energy balance of the repair would outweigh the balance of recycling – then the materials would have to go back into circulation. If there was a global consumer boycott, then perhaps government support could be obtained. It would seem that this is death for innovation. I suggest, however, that we stop calling getting a slightly better camera each year innovation – only that which can develop like a living organism will be truly innovative.

Even if together we were able to reduce the required amount of energy and natural resources, we would still need a constant, even small, inflow from the outside. There are increasingly more people, which is why demand is constantly increasing. We must be aware that one day, the Earth’s resources will end. But I believe that by then we will be able to obtain these resources from space – by extracting metals from asteroids with the use of microbes, for example. And that we will finally colonize other planets.

But if technology is the source of all problems, perhaps we need to get rid of it? In my opinion, that’s impossible. Technology is the result of our biology and is a natural part of man, just like speech or abstract thinking. It’s a way of adapting to the environment, extending our body. It externalizes our needs, habits and desires. To get rid of it, we would have to get rid of almost everything that is human and deny all our history, hundreds of thousands of years of evolution. Technology can destroy or save us. Destroy, if we leave our approach to the economy and natural resources unchanged. Save, if we re-evaluate ourselves and start a new culture of consumption. The economy of one collective organism that consciously adjusts its needs to the possibilities of the environment. Regardless of whether it is Earth, or – in the future – other planets. That is why it is so important that we unite in our efforts for the future.

Translated from the Polish by Joanna Figiel

Also read:

2020: A Smog Odyssey 2020: A Smog Odyssey
i
Photo: Courtesy of Jonathan L. Ramsey
Opinions

2020: A Smog Odyssey

A Foreigner’s Perspective on Polish Smog
Jonathan L. Ramsey

Before I start, let me say that I am not an expert in air pollution so if you, dear reader, decide that this disqualifies what I’m about to say, then I will understand. I speak Polish, I have a permanent residency, I am a taxpayer, and I feel that I have a right to speak about this issue. But on the other hand, you could say I am just a strange 32-year-old guy from America, which is by far the largest per-capita emitter of C02 in the world, the most wasteful society in Earth’s history, and as it happens, the country that Poland is trying to imitate more and more with each passing year.

I moved to Poland in 2010 at age 23, and during my first six years here I never heard a word about the smog and never considered the effect that it would have on my health or anyone around me. It simply was not an issue that anyone I knew discussed. But I became interested in the issue, like many people, during January 2017, when a huge wave of smog hit Warsaw and shrouded the city in pollution for 10 days.

Continue reading