By Jake Lyne · 21st January 2023
“The world remains on an unsustainable path.” – Spencer Dale, Chief Economist, British Petroleum, June 2022
Two Buddhist teachers have been major influences in my life, the late Chan Masters Sheng Yen and John Crook. John Crook was a naturalist, deeply concerned and at times very angry about the harm we have been doing to the natural world.
Master Sheng Yen taught that four ‘environments’ should be protected: the spiritual environment by keeping our minds stable and pure; the natural environment by maintaining the co-existence and co-prosperity of the whole earth community (all sentient beings); the living environment by taking only what we need and minimising waste and pollutants; and the social environment by being dignified and humble in society.
He also taught that when confronted with any situation or problem we should adopt the attitude of wisdom by 1) facing the problem, 2) accepting it, 3) dealing with it and 4) letting it go. I will use this fourfold framework to consider the path of the Ecosattva. An Ecosattva is a Bodhisattva, but with a particular focus on sustainability and ecology.
Step 1: Facing It
The period of the last 11,000 years is known as the Holocene epoch, a time of unusually stable and benign climate, during which human civilisations evolved. Since 1950 we have entered the epoch of the Anthropocene, in which humanity now drives ecological change at planetary scale; a period during which human-caused ecological crises have been developing. The ecological crises we face today will get worse; potentially a lot worse. How much worse depends on all of humanity, all of us.
Scientists have identified a ‘safe operating space’ defined by 9 planetary boundaries. Climate change and loss of biodiversity are the core boundaries, most critical for our survival. Biodiversity and climate change are mutually interdependent. If the natural environment is in good health, then forests, the oceans, wetlands, grasslands and soils become carbon sinks and so help keep the atmosphere free of excess greenhouse gases. But high levels of greenhouse gasses exceed the capacity of the biosphere to absorb excess carbon and this problem is exacerbated by human destruction of rain forests, degradation of soil quality etc. The other seven boundaries if crossed, increase pressure on these two. To date six boundaries have been exceeded and the boundary for a seventh, ocean acidification, that is a consequence of ocean sequestration of excess levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, is likely to be breached by 2050 if current trends continue.
“Transgressing a boundary increases the risk that human activities could inadvertently drive the earth system into a much less hospitable state, damaging efforts to reduce poverty and leading to a deterioration of human well-being in many parts of the world, including wealthy countries.” [1]
The six boundaries that have been breached are climate change (CO2 concentration in the atmosphere too high), biosphere integrity (extinction rates threatening a sixth mass extinction), land system change (e.g. rainforest cleared for agricultural use), novel entities (e.g. chemical and plastic pollution), phosphorous and nitrogen cycle disruption (resulting in poor air quality and algal blooms that threaten human health and sea life) and freshwater change (e.g. drought and flooding affecting food crops and plant life).
Climate change has attracted the most attention. The world is warming rapidly, glaciers are disappearing, storms, floods, forest fires and droughts are increasingly severe, and scientists warn that we are approaching, or may already have passed significant tipping points, after which some changes could accelerate or be irreversible.
Our civilisation has flowered in the last 200 years, due to the discovery that the earth’s crust is a giant battery that stores vast quantities of ancient solar power in the form of oil, gas and coal. Human ingenuity has resulted in technologies that allow the energy from this battery to be tapped at all scales, from large organisations and machines, down to individual households and motorists.
In 2021, the International Energy Authority set out a pathway to ‘net zero’ by 2050, that is an example of policies that must be followed if global temperature rise since pre-industrial times is to be limited to 1.5°C. In this pathway no new oil, gas or coal fields should be opened post-2021. There needs to be massive acceleration of renewable energy, associated with rapid improvements in energy efficiency so that overall energy demand does not rise and net CO2 emissions reduce to zero. Countries need to back up targets with clear policies and plans and need to act on these plans.
However, there is a huge gap between this net zero pathway and what is happening. At present there are 2,800 coal mines operating in the world and proposals for 470 new mines or extensions. There are almost 5,000 oil and gas extraction sites in the world, a further 79 in development and 108 new discoveries. Here is a 2018 quote regarding one of these discoveries: Mark Thomas, BP North Sea Regional President said: “These are exciting times for BP in the North Sea as we lay the foundations of a refreshed and revitalised business that we expect to double production to 200,000 barrels a day by 2020 and keep producing beyond 2050.”
Countries that have set net zero goals have not identified policies that would be sufficient to meet net zero, and progress on implementing policies that are in place were declared as ‘woefully inadequate’ by the United Nations. Even if all policies in place were implanted the world would have warmed by between 2.4 and 2.6°C by 2100.
The Energy ‘Hockey Stick’ Graph
Until now, world energy consumption has been rising rapidly since the 1950s and is continuing to rise. In 2021 world energy demand increased by 5.8%, off-setting the reduction in energy use during the pandemic. On current trends, by 2050 world primary energy consumption may be 45% greater than current levels, due largely to developments in China, India and other Asian countries as they catch up with living standards enjoyed in Europe and North America. Even with the development of renewable energy, on current trends, 50% of energy would still come from fossil fuels.
Exponential Greenhouse Gas Levels
Burning fossil fuels pollutes the atmosphere. Roughly 36 billion tons of CO2 were released into the atmosphere in 2021. The annual increase of CO2 in the atmosphere has been accelerating and is now double the rate that it was in 1960. The level of CO2 in the atmosphere is comparable to the level in the Pliocene epoch 4 million years ago, when the average global temperature was 3.9°C warmer than in pre-industrial times and sea levels were 23m higher.
Methane (CH4) levels are also rising sharply and this rate is also accelerating, and especially markedly in 2020 and 2021. Methane is at least 25 times more potent than CO2 as a greenhouse gas, and at present contributes to between 16 and 20% of global warming. It stays in the atmosphere for 12 years, but the replacement rate is greater than the rate of decay.
Natural gas extraction is also associated with significant release of methane into the atmosphere, through gas flaring, deliberate release from damaged pipelines prior to repairs and leakage across the whole gas network.
Negotiated Failure
It is remarkable that in agreements from the first 25 COP (Climate Change Conference of the Parties) meetings, fossil fuels were not mentioned at all, due to the lobbying influence of fossil fuel companies and their political supporters. These talks have not even resulted in a reduced rate of increase in greenhouse gasses, let alone led to any reductions. For the first time, in COP26 there was an agreement to phase down unabated coal (i.e., in coal plants without carbon capture, utilisation and storage, CCUS), but with no timetable. At present there are 7,500 coal fired power stations in operation or in construction worldwide and only five are ‘abated’. The cost of CCUS is a disincentive to retrofitting power stations, so whilst coal is likely to be phased down eventually on cost grounds, without a clear timetable this will be too slow to meet climate goals.
Oil companies have been lobbying for years to persuade governments that natural gas should be treated as a ‘transition fuel’ and this phrase was included in the COP27 agreement, but targets for phasing down gas were resisted. This is no surprise, because 100,000km of new pipelines are on schedule to be completed by 2030 and there are plans for an additional 100,000km thereafter. This is despite a statement by the International Energy Authority that emissions from unabated gas fire plants need to reduce by 4% annually to 2030 to meet net zero commitments.
Specific plans to reduce oil extraction have never been agreed at any COP meeting.
Whilst the Climate Change COP meetings are in the public eye, the work of the World Energy Council (WEC) attracts much less attention, yet this organisation has far more power and influence on energy policy than COP meetings. There are 3,000 member institutions of the WEC and 90 country members; it is the principal network for energy suppliers and energy politicians in the world.
The Council frames its work on a ‘trilemma’, the balancing of energy security, energy equity and environmental sustainability. We only need to think of the Russian attacks on energy infrastructure in Ukraine to recognise the importance of energy security. Energy equity is indexed by access to electricity and to clean cooking in developing countries, and by energy consumption per person, with the highest rates of consumption, by some margin, for Canada and USA. The emphasis on sustainability is crucial as part of the World Energy Council’s vision for ‘the great transition’ to clean energy sources.
However, the trilemma model is flawed. First, it treats the three issues of the trilemma as of interchangeable importance depending on circumstances, rather than treating sustainability as the non-negotiable issue (since we cannot negotiate away the physics of climate change) within which energy security and energy equity must be managed. Failing to make sustainability the central priority means that vested interests in “business as usual” can be disguised. Fossil fuel companies can downplay sustainability, claiming that security and equity are a higher priority in the near term, and thereby advance their business interests. The war in Ukraine has made it easier for oil companies to justify massive investments in gas extraction, by emphasising energy security, whilst being lacklustre about investments in renewable energy. Here is an email exchange that occurred in the lead up to COP27 in Egypt, which illustrates a lack of enthusiasm for renewables by an oil and gas company: An internal email sent by the British Ambassador in Egypt reports that BP had admitted in a meeting that it had ‘its hands full with gas’ and had been ‘low key’ about green energy projects in Egypt, with the Ambassador remarking to a colleague that BP Egypt ‘certainly won’t be the vehicle’ for energy transition initiatives in the region. [2]
The equity argument has been used to justify exploitation of gas reserves in Africa, the argument being that African countries can use the wealth generated from selling gas to further their development. However, not only is exploiting gas environmentally unsustainable, there is a risk that Africa will be left with more debt than benefit as the price of renewables eventually undercuts the price of gas. The solution to equity is for wealthy countries to honour commitments made in COP meetings to provide financial support for developing countries during the transition away from fossil fuels.
Secondly, the emphasis within the equity dimension is one sided. The WEC emphasis on ensuring access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all is laudable, as is an emphasis on improving energy efficiency, but no mention is made of the threat to sustainability due to the excessive energy demands of the world’s richest countries.
The UK Parliament Environmental Audit Committee argued that there is no need to balance security and equity against sustainability: “The energy trilemma can be solved by tackling all three issues together. There are many opportunities to achieve synergies between affordability, security and sustainability.” [3]
Renewable Energy
A fast transition to renewable sources of energy would pay for itself, because the cost of energy would be lower than it is now. [4] It would also limit some of the serious impacts of climate change, such as loss of agricultural productivity, effects of sea level rise and sea acidity, biodiversity loss, water shortages, human conflict and harm to the health and well-being of people in countries at most risk of climate damage. However, a slow transition is both harmful to the climate and expensive, partly because it is expensive to run two systems (extraction of fossil fuels and reliance on renewables) in parallel for an extended period. Job losses in the fossil fuel industry will be a significant issue, but ultimately the energy transition will result in far more new jobs than jobs lost. [5]
Achieving a fast and fair transition depends upon many factors, including support from wealthy countries to developing countries, investment in training, policies to manage loss of employment in the fossil fuel sector, financial policies that curtail fossil fuel subsidies and transfer support to renewables, and strong political leadership. These are formidable challenges in our divided world and especially following the war in Ukraine and weaponisation of energy supply.
Other Hockey Stick Graphs
I have gone into some depth regarding climate change and its relationship to energy use. Any of the other planetary boundaries could have been chosen, because in most cases the graphs of change are a similar shape (the hockey stick shape) to the global primary energy consumption graph. Each has a long flat line which suddenly takes off and becomes exponential from 1950 onwards. This applies to plastic production and plastic waste (waste is expected to triple by 2060 without radical change to current practices), population growth, world GDP, extinction rates and many others.
What we have to face
The greatest ecological threats, defined by the nine planetary boundaries are nearly all going in the wrong direction and moving the world towards potentially catastrophic consequences. Even in relatively optimistic scenarios, glaciers will continue to melt away, Arctic sea ice cover will continue to shrink in the summer, sea levels will rise and extreme weather events with their associated storms, floods, droughts and forest fires will increase.
Some of these effects have the potential to stabilise if the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere is brought down rapidly in the near future, but this will only happen if the biosphere (trees, forests, wetlands etc.) has the capacity to reabsorb a significant proportion of the excess CO2 that has accumulated in the atmosphere, which is why it is so concerning that the safe planetary threshold for the biosphere has been crossed. But even with natural CO2 sequestration and achievement of net zero in 2050, reversal of ice and sea level changes will take centuries. [6]
However, we should not fall for speculative doom scenarios as if they are fact. Valid scientific consensus is the best guide to what is needed, what is possible and what may or may not happen. It is far more motivating to create a vision of a possible future where the earth returns to a healthy, stable condition in which life can thrive.
Step 2: Accepting It
Having faced a problem, accepting it means taking responsibility and being determined to take the problem seriously. Fossil fuel lobbyists have attempted to shift all of the responsibility onto the public as a way of hiding their focus on maximising profit from continued oil, gas and coal extraction. So, whilst we should not fall for this, it remains the case that we can all take some responsibility for the unfolding crises.
Acceptance it is not easy and is not a once and for all matter. The world crisis is deeply disturbing and demanding. Feelings of sadness, fear, helplessness, hopelessness and rage come and go as we face up to what is happening. However, practicing Buddhists have many different forms of meditation that help with acceptance. Practices that induce awareness of impermanence reduce suffering and increase clarity; metta practices induce universal compassion, touch the heart and reduce ‘compassion fatigue’; practices that develop bodhicitta (the wish to help all beings be happy) prepare us for finding our authentic response to the crises that we face.
Acceptance also requires wisdom. It is wise to become knowledgeable about the issues, trying to listen to all sides of an argument. It is wise to recognise that the problems are on a very large scale and individual contributions are mostly very small, but nevertheless essential in adding to the collective efforts of the millions of other people concerned about the same issues. It is also wise to make contributions that are appropriate to our personal talents, skills and resources and to rejoice in and support the contributions of others.
Step 3: Dealing with it
Master Sheng Yen emphasised acting with energy and self-confidence, based on careful planning and execution. The range of contributions people are making across the world is dizzying. There are so many individuals and groups working on so many different issues, ideas and forms of activism to try to shift towards a sustainable future for life on earth. There is no problem with finding something more that we can each do, the possibilities are limitless.
Responding skilfully is to have a no-self attitude, which means not putting one’s ‘self’ in the centre of the things. It is to work with attention, clearly focussed in the present moment, with the mind on the job, rejecting hidden agendas, judgementalism, self-criticism and self-aggrandisement. It involves taking care of oneself and others and neither over-estimating nor under-estimating one’s capabilities. When a task is completed, it is good to acknowledge what has been accomplished.
Step 4: Letting it go
Ecological crises will not go away in our lifetimes. But there is no need to make care and concern into an overwhelming burden. Letting it go means accepting that we have no control on longer term outcomes. We will see more set-backs, losses and disasters as the climate and other crises unfold. We will also see new ideas, developments, successes and changes.
Letting it go means letting go of what we have accomplished when it has been completed, creating space for the next contribution that we might make and taking a rest when we need to.
Given the normal human life-span, we will only ever know about the early years of the Anthropocene, we cannot read to the end of the book and any ideas we have about the very long term are merely speculation. This is not to deny the disturbing trends, nor the gravity of what is very likely to occur over the next decades.
What we do know is that the earth does not need us, but we need the earth. ‘Letting it go’ means devoting ourselves to fully respecting that situation and proceeding with all the love, energy, determination and compassion we can muster, so that our lives and the lives of all beings on this earth are helped as much as is humanly possible. The ecosattva vows are a guide for doing this.
The Ecosattva Vows
The ecosattva vows are based on vows that Joanna Macy developed in a workshop on The Work that Reconnects and subsequently published in her book Active Hope. A sixth vow (third on the list below) was added in a collaboration between Joanna Macy and the One-Earth Sangha. [7]
A vow is a commitment, or undertaking and like the Bodhisattva vows, Ecosattva vows are limitless in time and extent. There is always more we can accomplish and learn as our appreciation and experience of them deepens. Vows do not depend on optimism or pessimism; they liberate us from binary thinking. They can become a continuous practice, with some vows becoming more salient depending on the situations we find ourselves in.
Based on my love of the world and understanding of deep interdependence of all things, I vow
To live in Earth more lightly and less violently in the food, products and energy I consume.
To commit myself daily to the healing of the world and the welfare of all beings; to discern and replace human systems of oppression and harm.
To invite personal discomfort as an opportunity to share in the challenge of our collective liberation.
To draw inspiration, strength and guidance from the living Earth, ancestors and the future generations, as well as siblings of all species.
To help others in their work for the world and to ask for help when I feel the need.
To pursue a daily spiritual practice that clarifies my mind, strengthens my heart and supports me in observing these vows.
Vows are also a personal matter, and maybe these words do not capture your vow: what is your vow? In a conversation, John Crook the naturalist once said “life is a fight”, a perspective for which there is quite a lot of evidence in the natural world. The stance of the ecosattva is also the stance of a warrior. In facing and responding to the human created problems of the Anthropocene, finding a fighting spirit is indeed an act of love for the world. A fight is not the only perspective, the deeper reality is interdependence and cooperation and this fight can only be won through deepening our understanding of the art of cooperation.
References: [1] Will Steffen, Stockholm Resilience Centre, 2015. https://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/research-news/2015-01-15-planetary-boundaries—an-update.html [2] https://cultureunstained.org/2022/11/11/bp-has-hands-full-with-gas-in-egypt-and-wont-be-vehicle-for-transition-concludes-uk-ambassador-in-email/ [3] https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5803/cmselect/cmenvaud/109/report.html [4] Way, Ives, Mealy and Farmer (2022) Empirically grounded technology forecasts and the energy transition. Joule v6. pp 2057-82; Jacobson et al (2022) Low-cost solutions to global warming, air pollution and energy insecurity for 145 Countries. Energy and Environmental Science, Issue 8. [5] Koberle et al (2021) The Cost of Mitigation Revisited. Nature Climate Change v. 11 pp 1035-45 [6] State of the Cryosphere Report (2022) https://iccinet.org/statecryo2022/ [7] https://oneearthsangha.org/articles/guideposts-on-the-ecosattva-path/
About the author
Dr Jake Lyne is an experienced Chan Retreat Leader with the Western Chan Fellowship and a retired Clinical Psychologist. He is one of the coordinators of the EBU Ecodharma Network and seeks to raise awareness of the extreme seriousness of the risks we and all species on earth are facing, and therefore of the need for urgent and determined action. He is married to Jan, who shares his interest in ecodharma, and they have three grown up children. In his leisure time he is interested in sailing and astrophysics and runs marathons for charity.
This article first appeared in EBU Magazine #10 – Ecodharma (Spring 2023). Download the full issue as PDF or browse all issues.