🌍 Is the planet Earth doomed?

:earth_africa: Is the planet Earth doomed?
0

#81

httpshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMNZXV7jOG0://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMNZXV7jOG0


#82

Such a poor post. It’s of stevesweb quality in a place where we expect a sound discussion.

Ffs you could have taken the time to make those links properly

:sunglasses:


#83

We’ll do what humans always do. Kill each other.

Ugo Bardi has written a piece about it.


#84

Apart from the laziness with the links, what?

A rising population of ever older people, burning more and more as they rise out of poverty, will do nothing but accelerate the problems.

Until we accept that the planet is overpopulated and our only way of keeping the numbers up is the cause of our problems, we face only one future.

We should be discussing how we change(not the wishy-washy renewables will save us) the whole way we live and how we manage a much needed decline in population and production, but we don’t. We constantly tell ourselves that we can go on as usual when all the evidence screams the opposite.


#85

If the problem is loads of people are gonna die, and the solution is loads of people dying, then, you know, that seems quite a nicely balanced equation.


#86

Nature loves equilibrium


#87

Depressing stuff but not anything that we are not aware of. It will be interesting to see how the whole N Korea stuff pans out. Probably our best bet for a new round of mass killing as Trump seems desparate to play with his lethal toys.


#88

Such a poor post. It’s of stevesweb quality in a place where we expect a sound discussion.

Ffs you could have taken the time to make those links properly

:sunglasses:

Apart from the laziness with the links, what?

A rising population of ever older people, burning more and more as they rise out of poverty, will do nothing but accelerate the problems.

Until we accept that the planet is overpopulated and our only way of keeping the numbers up is the cause of our problems, we face only one future.

We should be discussing how we change(not the wishy-washy renewables will save us) the whole way we live and how we manage a much needed decline in population and production, but we don’t. We constantly tell ourselves that we can go on as usual when all the evidence screams the opposite.

Here is the rub.

The people who are most aware of Climate change and it’s implications are those in the “Developed World”.

Almost every solution put forward so far requires cutting back or substantial infrastructure investment.

Yet 2/3 of the planet lives in or below the poverty level and in undeveloped countries.

Just as they are starting to become “more equal” we now preach no you cannot burn fuels, cut down forests to build industries - in fact you have to stay poor and get poorer.

Trickle down economics have failed to enrich their lives - whether in the Mining of precious commodities or expanding factory farming.

So basically the “old rich” will “keep down” the poor again.

Not an easy argument however it is looked at and MUCH harder when you have to look at lifestyle changes for the entire planet not just “those that care”.

It comes back to my flippant “Primark” comment before - societal change needs to come from buying Quality that LASTS not new cheapest price shit every few weeks, THEN take that to all areas of life - keep your car for 10 years or more, don’t change your phone every time a contract expires. Don’t buy the latest gaming consoles …

Yeah good luck getting that started even though it is CRITICAL!

And I was being light hearted it was a good post :lou_eyes_to_sky:


#89

Yeah, that’s the point. I don’t want to hold the poor in place while the West enjoys the good life. We need to live more like the poor, not encourage them to waste all our resources as we do.

All your suggestions are needed and much more, just have to destroy modern thinking first. We’re fucked until people grasp the reality of what the only viable future looks like.

The call of life documentary shows it much better than i could explain it. Well worth a watch if you get the time.

Turn off your ac now and never turn it on again. :lou_smiley:


#90

Are you kidding me and the other Phil would die.

We need AC to live a normal life.


#91

Nah I’m good, can keep the A/C on all day these days with no conscience…

We’ve gone all Solar down here - huge farm in Abu Dhabi and one being started up here, strangely we’ve discovered deserts & Solar may go well together. (see note below)

Half-way to going Nuclear as well.

(Note)

Actually, Solar & Desert is a nightmare - Desert = Sand. Also = differential heating = winds.

So the Solar Panels need to be washed. With water. IN a Desert.

(Which is why the planet is saved crew who espouse covering the Sahara with panels are so dumb)


#92

I’ve always accepted that the people in power must know the problems racing towards us(i do, so how could they not).

Are their solutions that grim, that they dare not reveal the path they plan to take?


#93

Yeah, that’s the point. I don’t want to hold the poor in place while the West enjoys the good life. We need to live more like the poor , not encourage them to waste all our resources as we do.

All your suggestions are needed and much more, just have to destroy modern thinking first. We’re fucked until people grasp the reality of what the only viable future looks like.

The call of life documentary shows it much better than i could explain it. Well worth a watch if you get the time.

Turn off your ac now and never turn it on again. :lou_smiley:

Can’t see this catching on.


#94

Nuclear is a bad idea. Resources running out faster than just about any other.

Not living in inhospitable environments is the answer. Back you come.


#95

And so we doom ourselves and everyone else, until whatever is left has no option.

Can i downsize my prediction to no more than 1 billion left in 50 years time.


#96

Please explain this statement in context to the rest as with resources running out nuclear is the answer.

less resources used and more power provided.


#97

This is from an article i linked on page 4 in reply to @saintbristol

As for global uranium supplies, the report says that current uranium production from mines is already insufficient to fuel existing nuclear reactors, a gap being filled by recovery of uranium military stockpiles and old nuclear warheads. While the production gap could be closed at current levels of demand, a worldwide expansion of nuclear power would be unsustainable due to “gigantic investments” needed.

Report contributor Michael Dittmar, a nuclear physicist at CERN, the European Organisation for Nuclear Research, argues that despite large quantities of uranium in the Earth’s crust, only a “limited numbers of deposits” are “concentrated enough to be profitably mined.” Mining less concentrated deposits would require “far more energy than the mined uranium could ultimately produce.” The rising costs of uranium mining, among other costs, has meant that nuclear power investment is tapering off.

Proposals to extract uranium from seawater are currently “useless” because “the energy needed to extract and process uranium from seawater would be about the same as the energy that could be obtained by the same uranium using the current nuclear technology.” Therefore within this decade, the report forecasts an “unavoidable” production decline from existing uranium mines.


#98

Don’t worry SoS.

Everyone on here has watched The Expanse. We know the answer.

Just need Brian to invent his Space Drive now to go get the free stuff up there


#99

Well, we were doomed form the start anyway…expected lifespan of Earth is around 7bn years but we are likely to get burned up 1bn years so before then as our local star decides to shake us down… as a planet of 4bn years old (or 7000 years if seriously deluded) we are beyond out halfway point… so we are fucked.

However, given that our lives tend to be more fun without smog, famine, starvation, death of children, extinctions and watching turds float past when having a swim, we might just want to think about how we treat the old place. The debate about global warming and various other macro climate change is a red herring. A distraction from the real question. Even if there is NO global warming and our predictive models are shit… should we not just be thinking WHY the FUCK are we happy pumping shit out there anyway? The treehugger v treefeller debate is as old and as long as CO2 has been pumped, but ultimately what matters more is just what it creates, because the long term view is we are doomed eventually, so lets at least try and keep the amount of shit we are surrounded with day-to-day to a minimum?


#100

So 25 years after the original “alliance of world scientists” letter, which was 20 years after “the limits to growth” from the club of rome(not one bit disproved), how have things changed? Nothing to worry about if the press reporting is anything to go by(I have waited and one article hidden in the independent is all i have seen).

The authors of the 1992 declaration feared that humanity was pushing Earth’s ecosystems beyond their capacities to support the web of life. They described how we are fast approaching many of the limits of what the ­biosphere can tolerate ­without ­substantial and irreversible harm. The scientists pleaded that we stabilize the human population, describing how our large numbers—swelled by another 2 billion people since 1992, a 35 percent increase—exert stresses on Earth that can overwhelm other efforts to realize a sustainable future. They implored that we cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and phase out fossil fuels, reduce deforestation, and reverse the trend of collapsing biodiversity.

How are we getting on with biodiversity?

90% of Big Ocean Fish gone since 1950.

80% of Antarctic Krill gone since 1975.

80% of Western Gorillas gone since 1955.

60% of Forest Elephants gone since 1970.

50% of Great Barrier Reef gone since 1985.

40% of Giraffes gone since 2000.

30% of Marine Birds gone since 1995.

70% of Marine Birds gone since 1950.

28% of Land Animals gone since 1970.

28% of All Marine Animals gone since 1970.

97% — Humans & Livestock are 97% of land-air vertebrate biomass.

10,000 years ago we were 0.01% of land-air vertebrate biomass.

Not so good then and that’s just a drop in the ocean of the destruction we have meted out to the only thing that keeps us alive(our biosphere).

Our lazy self delusion really does know no bounds.