Happy Earth Day, 2012! Many of you have probably glanced at the Mayan Calendar and, upon seeing no 2013, assumed the end is nigh, and this is the last Earth Day. (Why else would John Cussack have agreed to this?) Of course others believe the Mayan calendar ending was a way for Mayans to ensure future calendar sales (I plan to buy one with a kitten) and so we will still need to make preparations for future Earth Days. Staunchly in the latter camp are the organizers of the Planet Under Pressure Conference, a convening of roughly 3,000 scientists from around the world whose State of the Planet Declaration [PDF] promises “new knowledge towards solutions.”

The conference met last month and was organized by The Global Environmental Change Programmes with the International Council for Science. Their goal was to provide some scientific underpinnings for the coming Earth Summit in Rio, to be attended by more than 100 world leaders, but maybe not our own. And while perusing their materials surely begs the question, “What can we learn from people who spell ‘Program’ with an extra ‘M’ and an ‘E’?” it turns out that the funny spelling means some of these people — like Sir John Beddington, the U.K.’s chief scientific advisor, and Phil Bloomer, director of campaigns and policy for Oxfam — are British, have corresponding accents, and are therefor very smart, so we should listen. (The conference, in fact, was in London.)

For busy diplomats preparing for Rio, the declaration distills the findings of the conference down to an easy-to-digest 14 bullet points. Most frank among the groups’s claims, and first of the three major themes addressed in the document, is this: “Humanity has taken a huge leap and become a planetary-scale force,” a statement which at first sounds absolutely awesome and makes me feel — as part of Humanity — like I am in Voltron. Upon further reading, however, it becomes a bit darker.

Since the 1950s, the scientists warn, the weight of human impact has grown to rival the effects of geologic-scale events like ice-ages and Bono’s ego, and this impact has pushed the planet into a new epoch, the Anthropocene, “with potentially catastrophic consequences for our global civilization.” (To watch a nifty video about the Anthropocene, narrated by a woman with a British accent and tracing the new epoch to its roots in, surprise, England, click here.)

Of course, to a reader of Grist, these dark portents may not seem shocking, but what is surprising is the conference’s second major theme: There is hope. The authors believe that “rapid scientific and technological progress can provide potential solutions.” And why not? We, as a scientific society, have walked on the moon, cured polio, completely eliminated the necessity of bread from the sandwich making arts, and developed a potato-cannon capable of firing hotdogs and found friends willing to let us fire them, point blank, into their faces. Truly, we stand on the shoulders of giants, and there is nothing we cannot do.

And the overriding theme of the State of the Planet Declaration is not only that we can right this ship, but rather that, safeguarding Earth’s natural processes, eradicating poverty, and supporting ecosystem health is, “The defining challenge of our age.” Sound goals indeed.

But the council goes on to argue that, while science must guide this process, enacting this change will require more than some technological magic bullet. It will require a massive cultural undertaking. “Innovation alone will not be enough,” say the authors, “We can transform our values, beliefs, and aspirations towards sustainable prosperity.”

And therein lies the third and final theme of the State of the Planet Declaration: We have got to act fast. “[Global] systems can confer remarkable stability and facilitate rapid innovation,” the report states. “But they are also susceptible to abrupt and rapid changes and crises, such as global financial meltdowns or the volatility of the global food system.”

Are the world leaders convening for the Earth Summit in Rio in June willing or able to make the kind of changes necessary to avoid this kind of meltdown? Judging from their preliminary agreement, called the “zero draft,” it doesn’t look good. But individual countries are planning to bring their own commitments to the table, and around the world, people are mobilizing for the cause.

And that is the real takeaway from the Planet Under Pressure Conference’s State of the Planet Declaration. We are staring into the teeth of an imminent global crisis of our own creation and we must act swiftly to avert catastrophe. But we are resourceful beings of limitless creativity and, if we can find a place in our society for Snooki, we are clearly capable of anything. And now, we as citizens of the Earth must band together to enact change, not just at the highest levels of government, but also in our own daily lives, to change the course of the world.

I, for one, am on board. After all I’m banking on at least another 5,126 years, or else I’ve just thrown away money on this 2013-7139 Mayan Kitten-A-Day Calendar.

Leaded gasoline: The gift that kept on giving

Some claim the decline of crack cocaine is the answer, or credit the rise of cell phones, while others point to improved policing techniques and the use of statistical crime modeling. I personally like the theory that the “three strikes and you’re out” policies brought us round the bend: Tying our legal system to the obtuse and arbitrary rules of arcane bat-and-ball games clearly smacks of crime-fighting genius. (Fun Factoid: Many of our cricket-loving British friends thank their once controversial “leg before wicket” law for completely eliminating regicide in the 20th century.)

A recent article in Slate posits that the continued decline may be the result of the “Obama Effect“: With an African American in the White House, blacks are optimistic about the future, and as consumer satisfaction goes up, crime goes down. But there’s another factor that may underlie all the others: It may turn out that violence has even more in common with a 1971 El Camino than we’d ever suspected. Yes, both are embarrassing hallmarks of American culture, but they also both sputter without leaded gasoline.

Lead was first added to gasoline in the 1920s, and it made cars go like stink, but in 1973, the EPA called gasoline “the most ubiquitous source of lead found in the air, dust, and dirt in urban areas.” As a result, the average American’s blood had enough lead to run a Chinese toy factory.

It turns out that low-level lead poisoning, especially in the first three years of life, has significant and often measured consequences. Children with high levels of lead in their blood have lower IQs and are more prone to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, impulsivity, and aggression. Further, the Public Library of Science-funded Cincinnati Lead Study observed 250 kids over a 20-year period and showed that children with increased levels of lead had decreased brain mass as adults, with heightened effects on the parts of the brain that regulate self-control. The results were even more pronounced for boys.

As lead poisoning rose, so did violent crime. Lead levels in gasoline grew through the ’40s and ’50s. As the children who huffed those fumes matured, crime rates began to climb dramatically, growing 350 percent from the mid ’60s until its 1991 crescendo.

A University of Pittsburgh study showed that children with increased blood-lead levels (but still within the range of EPA-approved levels) showed greatly increased tendencies toward aggression and were four times as likely to get into trouble with the law. The study estimated between 18 and 38 percent of delinquency in the Pittsburgh area could be pinned to lead poisoning.

The good news is that the Clean Air Act changed the game. From 1975 to 1990, lead in gasoline dropped a precipitous 99 percent. Correspondingly, lead in Americans’ blood dropped over 81 percent from 1976 to 1991.

Now, according to research by Amherst economist Jessica Wolpaw Reyes, the lead is disappearing and the violent crime rate is dropping as well, with a 56 percent decrease in violent crime from 1992 to 2002. Even with an economy plummeting to record lows and Dancing With the Stars ratings rocketing to horrifying highs — factors traditionally associated with driving people toward desperate mayhem — violent crime rates continue to drop to levels not seen since the early ’60s.

To put it into context, had the murder rate remained steady at its 1991 rate, 170,000 more Americans would now be dead — a number greater than the population of Dover, Del. By 2020, all adults in their 20s and 30s will have grown up with no exposure to leaded gasoline, and if the theory holds, violent crime will continue its decline.

The Clean Air Act and the EPA helped reverse the trend of violent crime and, while there aren’t as many El Caminos on the road, the auto industry has soldiered on even without its precious lead, turning its attention to fuel-efficient alternatives to the poison belchers of the 1970s.

Yet despite the success of the Clean Air Act, both intentional and unintentional, legislators continue to push off environmental regulations claiming economic concerns. Just last month, the Obama administration cited a disappointing jobs report as reason to withdraw the EPA’s Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards. This, despite the EPA projecting that the new standards would save 4,300 lives and prevent 7,000 hospital visits each year.

And those are just the expected benefits. In 1975, no one predicted cutting lead from gas would cause a drop in violent crime. Who knows what cutting ozone pollution might do? Perhaps scientists in 30 years will realize that ozone poisoning made us laugh at More Cowbell or caused Bruce Willis to think Uggs would be a good look.

The possibilities are endless. Act now, and the kids of today can use their giant lead free brains to solve the next big problem: All of these damned dancing stars!