I enjoyed reading the Hub by Nachase on the query "What will the world be like in 100 years?" Like others who commented on its optimistic outlook, I was uplifted by the positive advancements we can surely anticipate. One hundred years is a very short time in terms of geological and environmental development; it is an eon, however, in the progress we can expect in our integration into a seamless personal information delivery system (phone, computer, entertainment, music, movies, medical records, driving records, criminal records, etc. all merged into one tiny chip embedded subcutaneously?). Food production geared to eliminate world hunger? Space exploration and exploitation?

There are some reasons to believe, however, that technology itself might counterproductively cause its own demise, or at least change the landscape beyond recognition. If the world population keeps growing at a constant rate (according to ibiblio.org/lunarbin/worldpop it has almost doubled since the late 1960's), and if no cataclysmic events cause the population total to drop significantly, there won't be enough food produced to sustain the growth. Hydroponic farming might become a part of urban living, letting us grow food on our roofs or even in our living rooms, but unless we get off-grid, use solar or wind power, and are prepared to face climate changes associated with global warming, we will not be able to sustain anything like life as we know it right now.

That does not mean that I think the world is coming to an end or that we will all be swallowed up by rising sea levels. But it is certainly true that some changes are happening much more quickly than even the most die-hard pessimists had predicted: witness the drastic (and I mean drastic) melting of the polar ice caps in the revealing article "Meltdown in the Arctic is speeding up: Scientists warn that the North Pole could be free of ice in just five years' time instead of 60" (Robin McKie, science editor The Observer, Sunday August 10 2008). Since the melting of the polar ice in the Arctic will mean a surge of cold water into the flow of the Gulf Stream from the Western Atlantic across to Europe, the Gulf Stream itself is liable to be diverted, weakened, or effectively "stopped." This will, in turn, cause the cycle of what was described to me as "the great heat pump of the north Atlantic" (thanks, Shawn!) to break -- warmer water is currently driven from equatorial north Africa towards the West Indies, thence north through the Sargasso sea and back across to northern Europe, etc. -- and once this warming influence is stopped from reaching Europe, real climate changes will take place.

No. I'm not an expert in climate change, population growth, or any kind of global transformation. But while I enjoyed Nachase's Hub, I wonder whether it encompasses the whole picture of the future as we might reasonably expect it to unfold -- given the evidence garnered by true experts who are monitoring these very changes. Let's hope they are wrong, or at least erring on the side of caution. But I'm still thinking about trying to live off-grid, anyway, just in case the hopelessly old-fashioned power grid in the States finally crashes. . . .