Natural disasters are becoming more frequent. And the explanation is always the same: climate change. Floods. Landslides. Torrential rains. Heatwaves. Extreme weather. But is it really that simple?
Because how much does it actually help that we sort our plastics, drive electric cars, and carry reusable cotton bags – when we’re simultaneously draining wetlands, cutting down forests, and destroying nature’s own safety systems? What’s the point of powering an excavator with electricity if it’s being used to flatten a wetland?
It’s almost comical how much effort we put into perfecting consumer behavior while the bulldozers roll in the background. Every time I see news of a new disaster, I can’t help but notice where the worst damage happens: where we’ve built. Where we’ve dug, drained, paved, and sealed nature in concrete. When hillsides collapse, houses disappear in mudslides, and highways fall apart, it’s not because nature suddenly turned dangerous. It’s because we made it dangerous.
Yes, the climate is changing – but we’re making nature more fragile
There’s no doubt the climate is changing. It always has. In fact, I recall reading that each ice age was preceded by a temperature increase. And yes, human emissions are undeniably a major factor. But while we debate carbon footprints and plastic bags in the ocean, we rarely talk about the damage from war, bombs, and ecosystem collapse – events that release pollution on a scale far beyond a straw or a shopping bag.
So maybe it’s time we ask a bigger question: How are we building our societies?
Because even if the climate is changing, it’s not the only driver of disasters. Much of the damage comes from how we build and interact with nature. Should we continue taking from it? Or is it time to pause – and build smarter?
Do we always have to expand outward, or can we begin building upward or downward, using land we’ve already taken and damaged?
When we remove nature’s safety nets
I once watched a reality TV show called Norwegian Truckers. One of the drivers proudly talked about her role in society – and rightfully so. Without heavy transport, things grind to a halt. But then she said something that made my ears perk up: she was delivering gravel to a road project and was happy to contribute to something new, “because it was just a swamp there before.”
And that’s the problem.
We don’t see the bigger picture. We look at wetlands as “unused land,” ignoring why they exist and what they actually do. It reminded me of something a former colleague once said when I pointed out that our boss might be thinking too big. He replied, “He’s thinking big, yes – but the problem is, he’s not thinking big enough.”
That’s exactly what we’re doing with nature. We think big when building roads, cities, and infrastructure. But we don’t think big enough when it comes to the consequences of removing nature’s own systems.
Wetlands aren’t wastelands – they’re natural infrastructure
A wetland isn’t “nothing.” It’s one of nature’s most important safety systems – acting like a giant sponge that absorbs and slowly releases water. When we drain it and cover it with gravel and asphalt, we lose that buffer. The result? More surface water, stronger currents, more erosion – and eventually, floods and landslides.
Think of it this way: if you pour a bucket of water onto a sponge, it absorbs slowly. If you pour that same bucket onto concrete, it runs off uncontrollably. That’s what we’re doing to the landscape. We remove natural buffers and then blame the climate when disaster strikes.
We point fingers at planes, cars, and plastic bags, and debate whether to eat meat – yet continue to destroy wetlands and forests. We could ground all flights tomorrow and still face disaster if we keep dismantling nature’s self-regulating systems.
We talk about emissions but ignore the causes. We focus on consequences but refuse to see the actions that trigger them.
And perhaps worst of all: we comfort ourselves with the idea that the solution lies in consumer choices – while the excavators keep digging.
“It’s never happened before!” – But have you looked at the full picture?
After every natural disaster, someone always says:
“I’ve lived here for over 50 years – and I’ve never seen anything like this before!”
But have you lived there alone, or have there been roads built, houses added, and natural systems altered during that time? That’s the point. It’s never happened before – because the landscape has never been manipulated like this before.
It’s not just the weather that’s changed – it’s the terrain we’ve created.
We think we’re saving the planet – while tearing it up
It becomes almost absurd when we’re told to do our part for the environment by sorting trash and driving electric cars – as if the real issue is where you put your milk carton, not the fact that we’re bulldozing ecosystems.
We talk about carbon footprints – but rarely about the physical footprints we leave on the landscape.
We’re obsessed with cutting emissions, but overlook that we’re destroying the very systems designed to absorb the impact of a changing climate.
- We drain wetlands – and get more floods.
- We cut down forests – and lose natural landslide protection.
- We blast mountains – and create unstable slopes.
And when disaster hits, we point to the climate. Not the bulldozer. Because, well – it runs on electricity.nser ikke.
Do we always need to build more?
Of course we need infrastructure. We can’t all live in treehouses and bike to work wearing solar-powered helmets. But we need to start asking the right questions:
- Do we always need new roads – or can we use the ones we have more efficiently?
- Could reversible lanes change direction based on traffic flow, like into cities in the morning and out again in the afternoon?
- Are traffic jams really about too few roads – or poorly maintained ones?
- Could regular maintenance and smart design be cheaper than building new?
What if we stopped expanding into untouched land – and used already developed areas more creatively?
- Could we, for instance, build railway lines on elevated platforms over existing roads to save space and reduce snow removal costs?
- It may sound radical or expensive, but the point is: we need to start exploring new ideas instead of repeating old mistakes.
And here’s the bigger question:
- How much of what we build is truly needed – and how much is driven by profit?
Are new highways built out of necessity, or because they benefit developers and contractors? Are decisions made for the public good – or to satisfy investors and lobbyists?
Governments often launch infrastructure projects during economic downturns. But how many of them are driven by real needs – and how many are just a convenient excuse to develop new commercial zones?
Would we still invest in them if there weren’t profits involved?
Must everything exist on one level? Could we start building upward – or even underground – instead of consuming more land? Is there something we could reuse, instead of always building new?
Natural disasters don’t just happen to us – they happen because of us
So maybe we should talk less about the climate – and more about how we shape society.
Why are wetlands so important?
We often view wetlands as useless swamps – land that just “sits there.” But the truth is, wetlands are among the most valuable ecosystems we have. When we destroy them, we lose much more than we think.
Here’s what wetlands actually do:
- Natural flood protection: They act like giant sponges, storing water and releasing it slowly to prevent floods and erosion.
- Carbon sinks: Wetlands store massive amounts of carbon in their peat layers – built up over thousands of years. When drained, that carbon is released as CO₂ and methane.
- Habitat for endangered species: Many rare plants and animals depend on wetlands for survival.
- Natural water purification: Wetlands filter water and remove pollutants before it reaches rivers and lakes.
- Drought protection: In dry periods, wetlands retain moisture and slowly release it, helping to maintain water supply.
- Fire resistance: Moist wetlands act as natural firebreaks.
- Cultural and historical value: Wetlands preserve environmental records and archaeological findings, giving us insight into the past.
And yet we keep draining them, filling them in, and calling them “wastelands.” But maybe we should ask ourselves: what’s the real cost of building over nature’s insurance policy?
And this is just about wetlands. I haven’t even started on forests, trees, and all the other free gifts nature offers – until we decide to “improve” them.
But let’s be honest: as long as someone profits from it, nothing will change.
Nature isn’t destroyed because we need to build – it’s destroyed because it’s profitable to build. Just like we don’t need a new phone every two years, but still get talked into buying one.
If we don’t find a way to make sustainability profitable, we’ll keep profiting from destruction.
So maybe it’s time to ask the real question:
How can we make it profitable to protect nature – before it’s gone?r på naturødeleggelser. Kanskje det er på tide å stille det egentlige spørsmålet: Hvordan kan vi gjøre det lønnsomt å ta vare på naturen – før den er borte?
Also read: Consumer Rights 2025: How Marketing Manipulates Us into Overconsumption
