EPIC GAZETTE Digital • Interactive • Independent
Science & Civilization
Future • Technology • Humanity
Capt.'s Column • The Future of Civilization

Are We Even Type I Yet?

Michio Kaku uses everything from planetary energy to Star Trek to explain a surprisingly serious question: humanity is technologically powerful — but are we civilized enough to survive becoming even more powerful?

Every once in a while somebody explains a complicated idea so simply that it changes the way you look at the world.

Physicist Michio Kaku does exactly that when he talks about the different types of civilizations.

And yes — he brings up Star Trek.

Which is probably one reason the explanation works so damn well.

Watch First • Michio Kaku on Planetary Civilization
Michio Kaku discusses humanity's transition toward a planetary civilization. The framework comes from the Kardashev Scale, which classifies hypothetical advanced civilizations according to the scale of energy they can harness.
Here's the uncomfortable part: according to this scale, we're not even Type I.

Wait. There are civilization levels?

Sort of.

In the 1960s, Soviet astrophysicist Nikolai Kardashev proposed a way to think about advanced extraterrestrial civilizations.

Instead of asking whether they had nicer smartphones, faster cars, or better social media — he looked at something much more fundamental:

How much energy can a civilization control?

That's a hell of a measurement.

Because energy is capability.

More usable energy means the ability to build more, move more, calculate more, travel farther, survive bigger disasters, and manipulate larger parts of the physical world.

Interactive • The Civilization Scale
Type 0
Us.

A civilization that has not yet mastered the full energy resources of its own planet. We still depend heavily on limited terrestrial energy systems.

Type I
Planetary.

Able to harness energy on the scale of an entire home planet. Civilization begins functioning on a truly planetary level.

Type II
Stellar.

Able to harness energy comparable to the output of its star. Now we're talking serious science-fiction territory.

Type III
Galactic.

A civilization operating across the energy scale of an entire galaxy. At that point our present technology would look primitive.

Click a civilization level. See what changes when the scale of technological capability moves from one planet to stars and eventually galaxies.

Technically, Kardashev's original framework starts with Types I, II and III.

“Type 0” is commonly used as shorthand for civilizations like ours that haven't reached Type I yet.

And that's where Kaku's speech gets interesting.

Humanity is powerful and primitive at the same time.

Think about the contradiction.

We split atoms.

We edit genes.

We put machines on Mars.

We communicate across the planet almost instantly.

We built an information network connecting billions of human beings.

We can look backward billions of years by collecting light from distant galaxies.

And yet we're still perfectly capable of killing each other over patches of ground, tribal identity, religion, politics, ethnicity, resources, and arguments our descendants may barely remember.

Our technology is becoming planetary. Our instincts aren't always keeping up.

That's the part of Kaku's speech I can't shake.

The interesting question isn't simply whether humanity can invent Type I technology.

It's whether humanity survives the transition.

Because technological power doesn't automatically produce wisdom.

Give a cooperative species more power and it can solve increasingly large problems.

Give a self-destructive species more power and you've simply improved the tools it can destroy itself with.

The Civilization Problem

Power scales faster than maturity.

Nuclear weapons, biotechnology, artificial intelligence, cyberwarfare and planetary-scale communications dramatically increase human capability. The harder problem is whether our institutions, judgment and cooperation improve fast enough to manage that capability.

And then Kaku brings in Star Trek.

Science Fiction as a Measuring Stick

Star Trek makes the abstraction visible.

Kaku uses familiar science-fiction civilizations as illustrations because suddenly the scale stops being abstract.

Instead of staring at enormous energy numbers, imagine civilizations where moving between worlds, manipulating enormous energy sources, communicating across vast distances, and operating beyond a single planet are ordinary parts of life.

That's what good science fiction has always done. It gives us a way to picture technology before we have the engineering to build it.

Don't get hung up on whether the fictional civilization maps perfectly onto a numbered category.

That's not the useful part.

The useful part is realizing the enormous gap between controlling a few energy systems on Earth and controlling energy on planetary, stellar, or galactic scales.

Type 0
Consume what's available. Fossil fuels, nuclear power, renewables and other energy sources without mastering the planet's total energy potential.
Type I
Think planetary. Energy, infrastructure, communications and large-scale systems operate at planetary scale.
Type II
Think stellar. A civilization capable of exploiting an enormous fraction of the energy generated by a star.
Type III
Think galactic. Technology operating across vast numbers of stars and potentially an entire galaxy.

Look around. You can already see pieces of Type I.

This is another point Kaku likes to make.

The transition doesn't happen one Tuesday afternoon.

Nobody rings a bell and announces:

Congratulations, Earth. You are now officially Type I.

Pieces appear first.

A planetary communication network?

We have the beginnings of one.

Global trade?

Absolutely.

Worldwide scientific cooperation?

Already happening.

International entertainment, sports, culture and information?

Every day.

Someone in Oakdale can build software that somebody on another continent can use seconds later.

That's pretty damn remarkable when you remember how most of human history worked.

Geography hasn't disappeared. But information increasingly ignores it.

That's why “global” doesn't have to mean erasing “local.”

This part matters.

Becoming more connected doesn't mean every town needs to look identical.

It doesn't mean culture disappears.

It doesn't mean Oakdale stops being Oakdale.

A planetary civilization can still have neighborhoods, farms, languages, traditions, football teams, restaurants, families, local newspapers, and arguments about whose barbecue is better.

Connectivity doesn't require sameness.

Civilization gets bigger. Community doesn't have to get smaller.

The scary part is the transition.

Imagine giving a teenager the keys to increasingly powerful machinery.

That's basically humanity.

We are learning to manipulate systems with consequences far larger than the communities, tribes, kingdoms, and nations our instincts evolved to manage.

A cyberattack launched from one bedroom can affect infrastructure thousands of miles away.

A laboratory discovery can affect the entire species.

A financial decision can move through worldwide markets.

A piece of software can reach hundreds of millions of people.

A weapon can affect generations.

That's Type I-scale consequence appearing before Type I-scale cooperation.

Maybe the final test of intelligence isn't whether a civilization can build powerful technology. Maybe it's whether it can survive having it.

Science fiction suddenly doesn't feel so fictional.

That's why I love the Star Trek reference.

Forget warp engines for a second.

The really interesting thing about those stories isn't the spaceship.

It's the assumption that humanity survived long enough to build the spaceship.

That's the part we haven't proven.

Warp drive is somebody else's engineering problem. Surviving ourselves is ours.

And maybe that's the real Great Filter.

We look into the universe and wonder where everybody is.

Maybe intelligent civilizations are rare.

Maybe life is rare.

Maybe technological civilizations don't last very long.

We don't know.

And if you read my previous column on arguments from ignorance, you already know what comes next:

“We don't know” does not mean we get to invent the answer.

But it's certainly worth asking the question.

Because Kaku's civilization scale gives us a fascinating way of looking at ourselves.

Not as the finished product.

Not as the masters of the universe.

But as something very early.

Something learning.

Something powerful enough to glimpse what might come next — and dangerous enough that getting there isn't guaranteed.

Capt.'s Take

We're still the rookies.

We argue about whether humanity is advanced while standing on one planet, using a tiny fraction of the energy around us, unable to travel routinely beyond our own neighborhood in space. On a cosmic scale, we're barely getting started.

Maybe that's good for the ego.

Humans love declaring ourselves advanced.

Advanced compared with what?

Our ancestors?

Sure.

Compared with a hypothetical civilization that harnesses the energy of an entire star?

We're the kids banging rocks together.

We may be intelligent. That doesn't mean we're finished becoming civilized.

That's what I took from Kaku's speech.

Not that Star Trek is a prediction.

Not that Kardashev gave us a guaranteed roadmap of the future.

And certainly not that becoming Type I automatically fixes human nature.

It's something simpler.

Perspective.

Our civilization could be much bigger than this.

Our technology could become almost unimaginable.

Our descendants could someday look back at today's civilization the way we look back at people discovering fire.

But only if there are descendants around to do the looking.

The future isn't just about what we become capable of building. It's about whether we're wise enough to make it there.
— Capt. Epic Gazette • Ask bigger questions.

Watch & Read More

Michio Kaku — Civilization Discussion Featured in This Article Michio Kaku — Physics of the Future / Planetary Civilization Background — The Kardashev Scale