The downslide of Climate Change policies

[Drew 0]

With Canada withdrawing from Kyoto and Durban talks stalled to just a promise to work on it, I think it's time we non-parents just party like it's 1999 and let the generation after next worry about it! The Economist says it best:

 

Climate Change: Durban

[loftus 42]

At the heart of everything related to climate change, resource depletion, deforestation, species loss etc is one overriding factor: Too many people, too few resources!

Anything that does not address this issue, that is not cost effective in the short and medium term at least (as are most solutions to global warming), are doomed to failure as immediate self interest and survival will trump everything. Malthus set it out first, and our friend David Attenborough addresses this refusal to isolate the heart of the problem and states it well. http://populationmatters.org/2011/news/dav...rsa-population/

Despite the yelling and screaming about wealthy societies consuming resources, it's the wealthy societies that have done the best job of population control and the 3rd world countries yelling and screaming need to address population growth issues in their countries.

As for addressing population, unfortunately birth control is not the only answer, as the adverse effects of birth control on population demographics and economic sustainability are evident in aging societies worldwide. Studies of sustainability indicate 2.1 kids per family is required to sustain the increasingly aging population. That will increase as we live longer. So we have to stop living longer as well.

So Drew, if we really want to fix the problem we all have to join the the Malthusian Society and remove ourselves from the population at about 65. I'm a few years away, and not planning to volunteer, anybody here planning to? Clearly David Attenborough is not either.

Edited December 14, 2011 by loftus

[johnspierce 25]

Really, there is no cause for concern. Soon, our smartphones will morph into SkyNet and our robot overlords will decimate the human population. Problem solved.

[RWBrooks 26]

I wrote about this once at University, so for what it's worth....:

The increasing, hungry human population uses up or wipes out practically all the Earth's natural resources and resorts to food production through artificial means, factory farming. Recycling becomes absolutely necessary and landfill sites are scoured clean for anything useful. Fanciful dreams of spaceflight are not abandoned but the resources required to do such things are more often diverted to more pressing projects.

The Earth becomes a huge farm. Due to problems in mass production we end up regularly poisoning ourselves and our planet. Once the regulating abilities of our planet are pushed beyond their limits, Humankind cannot survive and the natural feedback systems kick in and wipe most of us out. The few individuals least affected by it's effects may or may not continue the lineage, however the likelihood of the bottleneck in our gene pool leading to some problems after that is highly possible, if not certain.

Look at bacteria in a Petri Dish, they continue to multiply uncontrolled until the food source in that finite system are used up. They then all die.....

 

so.... tie a knot in it Homo sapiens.

 

btw, the lecturer thought my essay was a load of bolx

[Drew 0]

That's cos it sounds like soclalism Richard! (Sorry! A rub @ the GOP cannot be suppressed )

[RWBrooks 26]

Politicians who are scared of standing up and addressing the underlying cause, which is human overpopulation, are the ones who need to be changed. The Catholic church also needs to evolve itself out of the dark ages.

As few too many people have said: if this is tackled, stabilised, even reduced then we do have a snowball's chance in hell of tackling the other environmental issues that plague our home.

If we don't tackle human population then we don't even have that chance.

Forget all these incredible natural events that we love: pristine coral reefs, mass migrations and spawning spectacles if the numbers of people needing resources from the oceans doesn't level off.

As an analogy: Palau is becoming ever the more popular for recreational divers. We "welcomed" our 100,000th tourist this year for the first time ever. At times there can be 30 boats at the most popular dive sites. In terms of numbers that is roughly 400 divers in the water at a site less than a square km in area. This is overpopulation. The natural environment suffers as does the general diving experience of each diver. The Mantas move away to deeper water, the sharks too, everything is hounded and stressed, the corals are kicked and grabbed. The Palauan authorities are still hesitating to limit the numbers of boats and divers at these sites, they know from studies they conducted themselves, tourists are unhappy with the impact of so many divers on the environment and their own experiences.

In short they are unwilling to make a stand to limit the numbers and risk upsetting anyone in favour of turning a blind eye to the problems. Hell, they won't even limit the use of gloves so that people actually give a FF where they put their hands.

So until the politicians change, and it is our choice who is a politician, nothing will change, it will just get worse.

[Drew 0]

I think there are 2 issues. One is population explosion, but the 2nd important issue is the fact that we all see the modern city life as the way to live, which is why resources are running out. Even at 3 billion, we'd run out of resources with the constantly increasing consumption (which I am blatantly apart of!) This is a case of wanting the cake and eating it.

[Damo 4]

Interesting views.

 

I wouldn't blame the politicians for our woes...or point the finger at the Catholic church.

At the end of the day...neither faction can control our rampant need to feed and breed. :-DD

All life on earth is in equilibrium....we just think we can shift that equilibrium in the favour of our species.

 

ps. Burger King, here I come!

[scorpio_fish 5]

Egads. Lots of "overpopulation" theorists. I thought Ehrlich had been fully discredited, finally.

 

I do not believe overpopulation to be a cause of global problems. Nor do I want any government dictating solutions to a perceived overpopulation problem. Our ability to feed the increasing population of the earth has actually increased over time.

[JKrumsick 3]

@loftus -

 

"Despite the yelling and screaming about wealthy societies consuming resources, it's the wealthy societies that have done the best job of population control and the 3rd world countries yelling and screaming need to address population growth issues in their countries."

 

I really don't think pointing a finger at 3rd world countries does much to solve the problem. I also disagree. The average American consumers 10x more than the average Chinese and 30x more than the average Indian. The problem is not only population, but also production of greenhouse gasses... which the USA is one of the worst, if not the worst offender.

 

We should focus on ways of reducing our carbon footprint (everyone look at what they do individually). How to start... move to New York City! People in the city consume less energy than their suburban counterparts...

[RWBrooks 26]

Next time you leave food on your plate and throw it away, drive your car when you could walk or cycle, upgrade any consumer product so you can have the latest and greatest because you "need it", consider those people in the 3rd world who use plastic bottles tied to their feet as shoes, are always hungry, dream of having a cow or donkey, have no schooling and will be lucky to live past 40.

Now go and have your Supersized Big Mac