This world … After these words, a two-minute video with slow-motion explosions, fireballs and burning people should begin. Why not? Whether it's dangers from outer space, a riot of natural forces, or the results of human arrogance, emotions will be provided - at least for those who are not used to them.
But true disasters are not isolated events of simple, solvable problems, and they do not end with the last loan disbursement. And it's not about the scale. The line that separates incident from disaster is determined by the willingness of the community and the ability to deal with the consequences. Vaccines, rapid response teams, and early warning systems can shift that line towards recovery, while poverty, corruption and ignorance are pushing it towards disaster.
For better or worse, technology and unprecedented control over life and death are likely to allow future disasters to unfold along lines unique to world history. Before you are the possible disasters of the future, which few will leave indifferent.
If genetic manipulation goes wrong
Let's delve deeper into destruction with one of the most striking examples of genie in a bottle from the tech world: genetic manipulation.
For a long time, ethicists and science fiction writers have feared that our genetic ambitions will outstrip our security guarantees. We could come to terms with the rudeness and cost of modern technology and hope that the reliability and adaptability of life will take care of the rest. But new techniques such as CRISPR-Cas9 have turned genetic manipulation into a precise and highly dangerous tool. What once took years and was worth a little luck now takes weeks and several thousand dollars.
Promotional video:
On the positive side, this technology could allow us to alter parts of the genome to fight off a fungus or, for example, give a mosquito genetic protection against malaria. But where old methods of genetic modification lead to population degeneration, new methods can allow genes to be passed down through the generations. Simply put, we can destroy an entire species with just one mistake.
In April 2015, a group of Chinese scientists described the process of using CRISPR-Cas9 when editing non-viable human embryos. Scientists have called for the freezing of gene experiments at such an early stage, and many journals refuse to publish such studies for ethical reasons. But bioethical standards tend to lag behind technology, and who knows what the less ethical side might go for?
Global pandemic
When it comes to biological factors that affect an entire species, humans often can't help it. The outbreak of the Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa in April 2014 raised concerns about how far and fast the dangerous disease could spread and how ill prepared we might be. And we can, because just days after the World Health Organization declared the region Ebola-free in 2016, another case has surfaced.
History has shown that a pandemic at all times could be beneficial, at least for those who survived it. In addition to the traumatic emotional impact, the pandemic creates certain prospects for poor countries and helps to restore the environment, if only it does not kill too many people. Among other things, the pandemic is changing the way societies work, helping to organize infrastructure and forcing people to spend their non-working hours caring for relatives.
A disease that kills 80-90% of all people on Earth can tip this balance towards a hopeless social and technological disaster. The more we travel, change the picture outside the window and interact closely with animals of different species, the more we increase our risks.
How likely is one of these events? It is hard to say. Over the past several centuries, a pandemic has occurred every 10-50 years, with the most recent being the global H1N1 pandemic in 2009 and 2010. It follows from this that another pandemic may well occur during your lifetime.
Coronal mass ejection
Coronal mass ejections (CMEs), or plasma and magnetic field ejections from the sun's corona, have a lot in common with pandemics. They follow a cycle, albeit much more regularly (conditions occur every 11 years or so). They also cause always different, but potentially devastating damage, and their scale of destruction depends, in part, on how strongly people are tied to technology.
In 1859, amateur astronomer Richard Carrington observed a solar flare that heralded a geomagnetic storm. The burst of magnetized plasma hitting the Earth created an electrical charge strong enough to power telegraph transmissions for several days. Since then, astronomers have watched such Carrington events (powerful solar storms) and the associated CMEs with growing concern.
We've been lucky so far. The flattening of the magnetic field softened the impact of the powerful October 2003 burst. However, it resulted in hundreds of millions of dollars in losses by disrupting flights, satellites and power grids. In July 2012, another blowout bypassed us.
In the worst case, such a blowout can lead to power outages and loss of GPS satellites. This means that there will be no trade, no cooling, no fuel or water supply - and this is trillions of dollars in losses and irreplaceable losses. Some experts are happy to predict that outages will only last a few weeks. But a quick recovery will not be possible if the coronal mass ejection melts all the transformers. In this case, the risks of social devastation and mass hunger will be very real.
Peak phosphorus
Speaking of mass famine, did you know that there is a theoretical limit to how many people the planet can support? It is mainly driven by the available solar radiation, but there are other limitations that we could have reached long before it.
In the 18th century, economist Thomas Malthus was deeply worried that the population was growing much faster than food. Today, many scientists dismiss its warning, but at the beginning of the 20th century there was a food crisis due to the lack of nitrates and ammonia. German chemists Fritz Haber and Karsh Bosch bought us a little time by inventing a nitrogen fixation process that extracts gas from the air and turns it into fertilizer.
Today there is a deficiency of another nutrient - phosphorus. Our bodies need phosphorus to redistribute energy and build cells and DNA. But our demand is likely to exceed supply in 30-40 years. And the move towards biofuel options only deepens the crisis.
Currently, a large amount of phosphorus is lost in human and animal waste. Much of what is left ends up in the trash can or washed off into drains. Replenishing these sources and finding new ones could buy us a little time, but everything has its limit - even the bounty of the earth.
Decreased thermohaline circulation
Like most natural mechanisms, the global climate system has a certain amount of built-in tools. But overcome a certain limit and coercive factors, or environmental processes that affect the climate, will prevail. Feedback may emerge that will change the climate for decades or centuries to come.
One nightmare scenario will come true when global climate change melts Arctic ice too quickly. The resulting freshwater will spread throughout the North Atlantic Ocean, closing the cycle of global currents vital to maintain the global climate. This cycle is called thermohaline circulation. Thermohaline circulation controls the heat and density of currents, and its movement helps distribute heat around the world. For example, Atlantic surface waters are warming near Florida and heading northeast to Europe, which partly explains the temperate maritime climate in London, although it is on the same latitude as Calgary in Canada and Kiev in Ukraine.
Studies show that in the past, thermohaline circulation has already stopped, apparently due to massive discharges of fresh water that occur during the decreasing ice ages. Whether such a cancellation will take place due to climate change is not yet clear, but the bulk of the data says that thermohaline circulation should slow down.
In the worst case, the effects of a miniature ice age, combined with other effects of climate change, would be seismic.
Super-earthquake in the Cascadia zone
The Western states of America and Canada are threatened by a powerful event: an earthquake of magnitude 8.0 or higher. The Cascadia Subduction Zone - a 1,000-kilometer zone where the Juan de Fuca slab slides beneath another North American plate - is now dormant long enough for inexperienced residents to tune in all over the cities.
To imagine the magnitude of the super-earthquake that could break out, it is enough to remember how a similar event affected the opposite side of the Ring of Fire, in Japan. In 2011, the 9.0 Tohoku earthquake and the subsequent tsunami killed 18,000 people, caused the Fukushima disaster and resulted in $ 200 billion in damage. All this happened in an area ready for earthquakes, just not so big.
A similar earthquake and tsunami has a 1 in 10 chance to hit the Pacific Northwest in the second half of this century. With current preparedness and awareness, such an event would disrupt the Interstate 5 corridor that runs along the West Coast, kill thousands of people and leave millions homeless and hungry. And with a probability of 30%, a subsequent smaller earthquake will occur in about the same time frame. In short, it was only a matter of time.
Killer asteroid
For those who love to indulge in disaster, nature offers many opportunities. Just ask the dinosaurs.
On February 15, 2013, a fireball exploded over Chelyabinsk in Russia, knocking out windows, but did not harm anyone to death. If he fell to the ground, tens of thousands of people would have died. In spite of everything, this event showed that the Russian roulette with the participation of the Earth and the asteroid was not over yet.
A few hours after that incident, a space pebble three times larger than the Chelyabinsk one whistled between the Earth and its artificial satellites. If this city killer had attacked a densely populated place like Moscow, chances are high that there would be no more life within the Moscow Ring Road. Millions of people would die.
Of course, 71% of the Earth's surface is covered by water, and many large land regions remain sparsely populated. In the rare event that a massive rock does fall to Earth, it has a very small chance of striking a populated area. But the destroyer of states or even planets will definitely arrive, the only question is when. Perhaps earlier than we think.
For example, Apophis - an asteroid the size of a nice house - could kiss our atmosphere in 2029 and possibly crash right into us in 2036 on the way back. Astronomers are optimistic, thinking that this will not happen, but if it does, then we will need to salute a piece of the 300 megaton atomic bomb, as well as the ensuing fires, famines and power outages.
Global economic collapse
While experts and politicians love to gossip about a global economic collapse in order to increase their electorate, economists are unsure of the chances of such a collapse. This is a sensitive issue, partly because forecasts can distort the very system they seek to describe, and partly because collapse can come from disparate sources, from deep and prolonged depression to runaway inflation. Economists are still trying to unravel the collapses that have already occurred.
As China struggles to lift its stock market and the European Union struggles to determine economic policies that are suitable for the diverse needs of its member states, the indicators are a little less obvious. Against the background of the deteriorating global climate and the struggle for energy, deterioration can be expected.
Or not. After all, this is the nature of this dark science: risk and uncertainty.
Singularity
Some say the world will end in fire, others in ice, and still others in artificial intelligence. One, second, third …
On the one hand, it's hard to imagine that we could be so stupid as to create a monstrous Frankenstein without an off button. But do not forget that some garage hackers or industrialists, obsessed with a thirst for profit, could have set themselves a solid goal - to create artificial intelligence at all costs.
Our further destiny may not be determined by a robot squeezing us by the throat. A society unprepared for massive job cuts could face a problem just as serious as the proverbial Hollywood robot. If robots start destroying jobs by the millions, humans will not be in a better position.
Optimists insist that these issues will resolve themselves, while economists insist that technology creates more jobs than it destroys. But even ignoring the risks posed by superintelligent machines capable of self-improving and destroying humanity in a split second, we will still face one of the most transformative moments in social and psychological history. Even our unwillingness can be catastrophic.
World War III
It is perhaps difficult to imagine a disaster more serious than the world facing the threat of widespread tactical nuclear strikes, cyber attacks and biological weapons. We haven't taken this idea seriously since the Cold War. But when experts from various fields were asked at the World Economic Forum which event will be the most likely and worst in the next 10 years, guess what they said?
The causes of a possible World War III are closely intertwined: lack of food and water security, financial crises, climate change, infectious diseases and deep social instability. Add to this the rise of nationalism, dubious territorial claims by large states, Japanese militarization and terrorist pseudo-states, and the picture begins to inspire fear.
Of course, one could argue that our global connectedness prevents any large-scale conflict; we will simply lose more than we gain. The United States is the largest consumer of Chinese products, and China is the largest consumer of American banks, and their economies are so closely linked that any conflict will result in mutually guaranteed destruction of the economy. But even during the First World War, few believed that it would happen. At the same time, then people were not threatened by the prospect of nuclear extinction. They also lacked access to satellite intelligence and instant communications. A third world war would be irrational, but not impossible.
ILYA KHEL