Doesn't have to be an asteroid. The Yellowstone supervolcano exploding would be catastrophic enough. What can we do within the limits of our technology to restore Earth's ecology to a safe level? Assuming we are adequately prepared before the event occurs.
Absolutely agree with this point! You also raised another interesting idea - since we don't know when a giant impact or similar catastrophic event will occur, we can't categorize it as a near-term risk or long-term risk. It could happen anytime within the near to long range. How are risks on that broad time scale defined?
Actually, my understanding is that astronomers have a pretty good idea of where all the dino-killer asteroids are in the solar system and that none of them are a problem for at least a century. Comets are more of a risk, though not much of one. That much is known at least. And similarly, the Yellowstone volcano is a bit over-hyped. The most likely disasters are a pandemic (seems quite likely now.) or a large coronal mass ejection aimed at the Earth, but those would primarily affect humans/technology, so again they might actually be good for the overall ecology.
There have been mass extinctions before, but it's a thing that happens once in awhile in geological time, so not really something to keep us up at night. Really human caused disasters - climate/pollution, nuclear weapons, rogue AI, are the things that are likely to get us.
unfortunately the world is growth and consumption hungry and we don't want to do anything that compromises wealth creation, even reduction targets are deeply resented, let alone actually achieving sustainable consumption levels.
Nothing in the universe is truly stagnant, and that applies to businesses. If a business is growing productively - meaning its revenue is growing faster than its expenses - then it is a net value creator. The more value a business can provide at a lower cost than other entities, the better all of humanity is.
If there are 5 companies, and 1 starts to do something wildly cheaper and better than the other 4, then we reallocate to that one and let the others die off (bankruptcy, acquisition, merging).
We like growth as a species because we always want more needs met at a lower cost. Then we can redirect the resources of less efficient firms to more productive ones. Onwards and forever.
After seeing how much trouble something relatively benign like Covid caused I think we would just fight each other. Countries/people with enough resources would make sure they are doing fine and the rest would have to figure something out.
We have a slow motion impact event with climate change, that we didn't do anything to avoid, and we are at a stage where trying to push the brakes when we are going at a 500mph and close enough to wall won't help neither. And we are still accelerating.
We as civilization are not willing to prevent that event, nor able to fix/repair what it will do, so what makes you think that we might be able to do anything with faster events like a supervolcano eruption or a big enough asteroid impact?
off the top of my head, given unlimited budget, I'd probably have a massive vault of seeds (not just in variety, in quantity, too,) and adequate staff in rotations in a deep-sea bunker. not near a fault line, but deep enough that surface conditions are less likely to impact (no pun intended). Sea vs land because "digging your way out" become less of a problem. If you had a truly unlimited budget, one could imagine an Ark of embryos and a sufficient population of young does of each animal species you sought to preserve.
That's a good human survival play book. But what are we capable of now to clean the planet after a quadrillion tons of ash and fire hits our atmosphere.
In the last major extinction event, it was the scrappy and efficient bottom feeders who survived, and the big dopey apex predators and megafauna who didn't.
