Global Warming

[British Red]

Sorry BR, the last I read was that the last year was the one that changed the falling population demographic

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/population-in-scotland-hits-a-31-year-high-1.1023902

Think that article says the same thing as it happens

“This is the seventh year in a row that the Scottish population has increased and most of the increase was because more people migrated into Scotland than left.”

Europe might be lowering its growth, but the UK isn't sadly

 

[andybysea]

never said it was bad or not,just that it was a reason for our population rise.

 

[Toddy]

never said it was bad or not,just that it was a reason for our population rise.

Yep, and it's noticeable that even if our population does rise at the present levels (25,500 in a year) that still puts our entire population at less than the *increase* in population than almost every other country. East Asia alone is expected to increase by 195,000,000, taking it's population to 2195,611,000
Makes the projection for the *entire* population of the UK about a third of their increase.

British Red, the Herald article was linked in agreement with the seven year increase, not in defence of my mistake over this year being the greatest, not the first, increase. I ought to have made myself clear.

cheers,
Toddy

 

[British Red]

Not a worry Toddy.

It does raise an interesting conundrum though if a logical plan is to manage population by restricting immigration. If we were to decide to restrict other countries from sending emigres to the UK (on the basis of population control) I assume we would agree that its reasonable that they insist on a similar protocol (i.e. UK citizens could not live there)?

Red

 

[wingstoo]

http://www.peopleandplanet.net/doc.php?id=199&section=2.html

6.795.329.623 people
46/km² | 118/mi²
» CountTheWorld «

Scary figures?

Concern over the world's booming human population - which has grown from three to over 6.7 billion in just 40 years - has abated somewhat as birth rates have fallen right across the world. But there is still a long way to go before numbers stabilise at somewhere between eight and 11 billion - and some countries, such as Pakistan or Nigeria, are on course to triple their numbers by the middle of this 21st century.
Globally, many experts are concerned that the earth's 'carrying capacity' is already overstrained, and worry that the huge impending increases in consumption in countries such as India and China will add enormously to the burden of greenhouse gases which threaten to heat the planet - not to mention all the other demands which increases in both population and consumption are putting on the earth's natural systems. Indeed some commentators argue that one of the best strategies for reducing future greenhouse gas emissions is to stabilise population as quickly as can be achieved by non-coercive education and reproductive health programmes.

Cheap oil means we can use machinery to till the soil that grows our food, when it gets too expensive to run tractors on oil based fuels then what?

BRs choice of population reduction is by far the better option than the resource conflicts that are already happening around the planet.

I think it was last year that a massive oil field was discovered, but the figures I read at that time showed that the way we consume oil in the 21st century it would last about 36 days, just wish I could find the article.

So how much do we use a day, some figures I found, link though they are three years or more behind.

85,085,664 bbl/day, nearly a quarter of this by the US

That is about 30 971 181 696 barrels per year a barrel being about 159ltrs.

It will stop being cheap to extract anyday soon, as it gets less available the cost will go up.

Can we use "Bio fuels" instead?

Of course we can't, we cannot grow enough of it!

They wanted to double the amount of "Bio fuel" added to the fuel we buy at the fuel pumps to 10%, but realised there just wasn't enough ground to grow it and have room for the other "Stuff" we needed to grow.

1 acre per person land available in the UK, including rivers, lakes, roads, forests, industrialisation and housing, not much left for growing enough food to stop the bellies rumbling is there, and using the next door farms cattle poop to make methane fuel to run our cookers and boilers etc isn't an option, because the next door farm will want the poop for his own needs.

This debate will go round and round until we are all spinning in our graves, after all we are, and have been on an extinction course from day one, it is just a matter of time.

But remember this, We do not own this place we live on, the place we chose to call Earth, we are only borrowing it from our decendants, let's try and leave them something worth inheriting.

Wings

 

[John Fenna]

It looks like I have done my bit to save the Earth - by not having any kids.....does that mean I can light my fire this winter?

 

[Toddy]

I haven't suggested limiting immigration or emigration. I have simply said that our population is not an issue in the scheme of things.
Other populations are a different matter entirely.

On the whole I agree that the world population needs to fall, but nagging at the Brits to do so is an own goal.

The world moves on. For a set of little islands the UK is a greater player in the world than it's size and population numbers would expect.
That's not egotism or nationalism, that's reality. I do believe that we need to be more careful and economical with our resources, more creative with our development and accepting that the price we pay for cheap imports is ultimately to our own detriment.

And that point, having diverged into politics, I suggest we return to the topic of the climate changes

cheers,
Toddy

 

[ged]

I haven't suggested limiting immigration or emigration. I have simply said that our population is not an issue in the scheme of things.
Other populations are a different matter entirely.

My reaction to this kind of statement used to be outrage. You cannot imagine how callous it seems to me. I do still think it's outrageous, but I think it's outrageous that your education has been so poor that you do not understand what's been going on. You can't see the big picture.

Let me try to explain.

Here in the west, dare I say in Europe, we industrialized before the rest of the world. We did it by working together to improve efficiency. The main reason that was possible was that we had a high population density and we could share and pool resources. It just happened that way, because we were crowded together like that. One result was that we had the Butcher, the Baker and the Candlestick Maker. They lived close enough to trade with each other, to provide goods and services to each other. Even if sometimes you might have grumbled about the price of a loaf, it was a lot cheaper to get it from the baker than it was to make one yourself, and it was fresher too. It's still that way. Of course then we also could have Newton, Pasteur, Watt, and even Chopin. Those people could not have done what they did if they'd had to survive by picking berries out in the fields all day, they wouldn't have had the time, nor the energy, nor the resources. There would have been no education system such as we know now to set things rolling, no hospitals, no police force, no welfare state. Once a basic level of industrialization and order is achieved, the rate of new developments can accelerate because people have so much more free time than they used to have. By free time, I mean time not spent on the mundane details of survival.

The developing nations didn't have the critical population density. It's no good saying they have a bigger population than we do so they should slow down a bit. The problem is that they also have a very much bigger land area. It's no good saying that there are just as many doctors in India as there are in the UK, because while in the UK you can drive to the nearest surgery in twenty minutes at the outside, in India it might be a couple of days' journey, on foot, carrying your kids, plus all the water and food you need to survive, and there's a fair chance of being robbed and/or raped along the way.

The thing you miss, when you tell everyone else what they should be doing, is that they only want to do now what we did ourselves in the last couple of hundred years. They are only now reaching the stages that we've already passed, centuries ago. You say "Why should we [childish tantrum deleted]" but I would say "Why should they forgo the things that we've already got?" If it means that they need to increase their population density to get what we have, why should they not do that? Because you say so?

I might also ask why we should not expect them to want to treat us in the way we've treated them in the past. Can you imagine people from Africa coming here to take slaves to work in their plantations? That's the sort of thing that we did to them. Queen Victoria ruled over the largest empire that this planet has ever seen. Tea, anyone? We displaced indigenous populations by the million and just took what we wanted. On 22 August 1770 Captain Cook, one of my greatest heroes, jumped off a small boat onto a beach and claimed for the Crown a continent that we now know as Australia. Doesn't the very idea leave you in shock?

As a result of what we took, in many cases by force, our standard of living changed beyond all recognition. But, unfortunately, our consumption of resources, particularly of energy, skyrocketed. That was necessary. We could not otherwise have achieved the things we have achieved. We use far more resources per capita than people in the developing nations. We have taken, and we continue to take, FROM many of those same nations, huge quantities of energy -- without which our entire way of life would immediately collapse.

You can understand the peoples from whom we have prospered not being very happy about the injustice. If you tell them it's their fault and they should shut up and get back in the hole, what kind of a reaction do you expect?

Three thousand people died in the twin towers. One of my old school friends died in the London bombings. They were just peacefully going about their daily business. I never asked my friend, but I suppose he rarely gave any thought to those people in developing countries who are unable to feed, clothe and give proper medical care to their children. I cannot condone the killing of innocent people, but I don't blame our poor relations at all for trying to make a point. Since the recent spate of terrorist incidents, and warnings of danger from the security services, I've been trying to understand why this should be happening. I think I know now, and I'm ashamed that I didn't work it out sooner.

Try to look at things from their perspective. It's worse for them, if anything, than it was for us, because they can see what's possible, and they want it. We really didn't see it coming, we just blundered into it like we blunder into everything, with little idea of what we were doing.

There's a problem, however, which some of us have started to notice. If the population density were to increase to levels at which everyone on the planet could enjoy the lifestyle that we enjoy here in the West, then the environment of the planet itself would collapse. It cannot support so many people. So we need to make some very big changes in the way we do things. We're all in the same boat, so to speak, on this one, and we have to show the rest of the world that we are willing to make some sacrifices. They need to see that it's hurting us too, even if it's just a little. I don't mean giving up chocolate, or putting off buying the latest HDTV for another year. If that's what we offered, they'd laugh in our faces.

Why do them Injuns always seem so mad?
You'd think that we'd done sump'n really bad...

 

[durulz]

My reaction to this kind of statement used to be outrage. You cannot imagine how callous it seems to me. I do still think it's outrageous, but I think it's outrageous that your education has been so poor that you do not understand what's been going on. You can't see the big picture.

How to win friends and influence people...
Opening gambits like that hardly endear you to others.

I always remember this saying (can't remember who said it though): the mark of the immature man is that he wants to die for a cause. The mature man wishes to live humbly for one.

Your ability to insult and alienate people marks you out.
If I was you I'd rethink how you conduct 'debates' with people or you may find yourself constantly banging your head against a wall.

 

[ged]

Opening gambits like that hardly endear you to others.

I always remember this saying (can't remember who said it though): the mark of the immature man is that he wants to die for a cause. The mature man wishes to live humbly for one.

Your ability to insult and alienate people marks you out.

Your are probably correct in at least some of the points you make, although I'm not sure I understand the sound bite.

I'm not trying to win friends, I'm just telling it like I see it. Sorry if that offends, it isn't meant to be offensive. It isn't necessarily the fault of someone who has been fed a lot of lies if they have been misled, and I don't mean to make it a personal criticism when I say that we've all been had. Our own government has routinely lied to us for as long as I can remember. They were doing it before I was born and I have little doubt that they'll continue to do it long after we're all dead.

It's reached the stage (quite a while ago, in fact) where people are willing to come to my country and kill my friends to try to make the same point that I'm trying to make here, and they must feel even more strongly about it than I do because some of them are prepared to die in the attempt. I don't think it's immature to want to better the conditions that your people live in. A lot of people actually worship a guy who for some reason, they say, got himself nailed to a cross a couple of thousand years ago for much the same reasons.

I've been banging my head against walls all my life. Sometimes I make progress, sometimes I don't. But this thread isn't about me. It's about something far more important than that. Please let's leave personal attacks aside and concentrate on the planet, at least for this thread. If Mary thinks I'm out of order, she's quite capable of handling it.

 

[Wayland]

......

...

...

...

...

...............

.....

 

[_mark_]

My reaction to this kind of statement used to be outrage. You cannot imagine how callous it seems to me. I do still think it's outrageous, but I think it's outrageous that your education has been so poor that you do not understand what's been going on. You can't see the big picture.

Let me try to explain...

Think you've said enough!

 

[wingstoo]

Originally Posted by ged
My reaction to this kind of statement used to be outrage. You cannot imagine how callous it seems to me. I do still think it's outrageous, but I think it's outrageous that your education has been so poor that you do not understand what's been going on. You can't see the big picture.

Let me try to explain...

What an interesting way to describe the education system here in the UK, but I think I see what you are saying; When things go wrong in modern communications we blame it on the computer, but as the old saying goes, "rubbish in, rubbish out", sadly if our education givers tell us incorrect or inaccurate information and we believe it then we are bound to someday regurgitate that information, but if someone then says the information we were taught was wrong it could be read as our education being poor.

We learn stuff everyday, some of it useful, some of it not, some of it accurate and some of it inaccurate, "we" might end up with the useless and inaccurate information, or we might end up with the useful and accurate information.

Sadly a lot of people either don't want to see "the big picture" (option I), after all it is pretty scary, others do see "the big picture" and feel that they can't change it (option II), others, like yourself Ged, "see the big picture" and do what you can to try and persuade others to see it as well in the hope that it will make a difference 9optionIII), sadly it quite often doesn't as when they see "the big picture" they refer to option II. Others look at their options and do what they can, even though in "the big picture" it probably won't make one iota of difference, but it will cushion the fall when it happens.

I don't read what you have written as an insult to the person, more a reflection of what the system has told us for too long.

Wings

 

[Laurentius]

I think its largely irrelevant as:



2)
The major problem facing the planet is not per capita consumption but population increase. Unless we tackle that, peak water, peak food etc. will hit much harder than climate change


Red

I agree that the basic problem is out of control population growth, Malthus was essentially correct it has just taken a bit longer than expected to see the evidence clearly.

It's not technology as such it's too many people living at an unsustainable pitch. James Lovelock notwithstanding it is all correctable in the very long run as the very unsustainability of it all will lead back to equilibrium, I expect all the rotting corpses of humanity will contribute to a future energy source just as all those carboniferous trees contribute to ours. But then we have no future anyway and never will have unless we can either get off the planet or retro engineer the Sun.

 

[Laurentius]

but in there somewhere isn't there the point that "...we get to +2C, which we will !

I think we have already

 

[Toddy]

I was taught (yes I really was taught to think, to deliberate, to understand, to be critically analytical ) that it was the height of discourtesy to say, "You do not understand! ". One ought to say, "I haven't explained myself clearly." and to think that way.
The onus to be clear is on the person communicating, not on the person listening or reading.

Ged, you are so far out of line it's on another planet.......without a spaceship

The greatest gift of humanity is communication, and in our modern world the speed of that communication, whether it be to keep in touch with family, to pass on information of events and rites of passage, or to spread the knowledge of innovation in healthcare, industrialisation, farming, environmental or political issues, is increasing at an exponential rate.
My old mobile phones are still in use, in rural Africa
The whole world wants to know what's going on.
How long do you think it's going to take until the knowledge of the problems of pollution, over population, social change, etc., is as widespread as the desire to have more of the bag and baggage of the first world economies ?
I think it'll happen much more quickly than the disaster scenario lovers and proponents will find palatable.

Three signs of humanity beyond the great apes.......fire, tools used effectively with the opposible thumb, and detailed speech.
We've just moved it up a few notches

As for this planet ? It'll see us and our children's children to the thousand degree out.
I would love to see what they make of it, see if we really do have descendants that roam the stars as easily as we roam this world.

Ah, but, I'm a contented optimist. No gloom and doom scenarios, just a preparedness to work and learn and live and enjoy it all.

cheers,
Toddy

 

[wingstoo]

 

[ged]

I was taught ... that it was the height of discourtesy to say, "You do not understand! ". One ought to say, "I haven't explained myself clearly." and to think that way. The onus to be clear is on the person communicating, not on the person listening or reading.

Ah. Apparently that bit wasn't in my syllabus, or if it was I didn't notice. I apologize if I seem discourteous, that is not my intention. Since being taken to task by others for what I've written I had already realized that I could have phrased one or two things a lot better than I have in my last few posts. For example I could have said that it's no reflection on the pupil if the teacher feeds him a lot of bull. Agreed that more recent education theories favour analysis over rote, but I have to say there doesn't seem to me to be much evidence that their application has had any effect. When I said how poor your education was, of course I should have said "our" education. It took me well nigh 40 years to realize how much propaganda we all swallowed at school. As I said, I think the first glimmers were when people started to fly aeroplanes into buildings in America, I can vividly remember sitting with Pete Taylor at Taylor Racing in Chippenham and watching people jumping out of high rise buildings to escape the flames.

Ged, you are so far out of line it's on another planet.......without a spaceship

Coming from you I have to accept that. If you can tell me where I'm out of line I'll be grateful. PM if you think everyone else will be bored by the off-topic stuff. I want to get a message across and I'm obviously not doing it very well. Clearly I should take more time instead of dashing something off in half an hour after work but it's difficult enough to get everything done in a day even though I threw out the TV over 30 years ago.

The greatest gift of humanity is communication, and in our modern world the speed of that communication .... is increasing at an exponential rate.

Unfortunately so is almost everything else. Exponentials are to be avoided, they tend to reduce the probability of survival. That's physics for you I'm afraid, there's no escaping it.

How long do you think it's going to take until the knowledge of the problems of pollution, over population, social change, etc., is as widespread as the desire to have more of the bag and baggage of the first world economies ? I think it'll happen much more quickly than the disaster scenario lovers and proponents will find palatable.

The information is out there already. But if it's as difficult to get it to sink in there as it is here, then as I've already said, we're probably doomed just by the physics. By the time we start to take serious action it will be too late to prevent the inevitable on the basis of what we know already. It's what we don't know yet that bothers me. Trying to be neither optimist nor pessimist (even the attempt goes against my nature) I'd say there's a 50/50 chance that there will either be some momentous discovery which means that we'll be saved from ourselves, or a similar one which means that we have no hope of staving off the inevitable. Given that assessment of the probabilities, it only makes sense to take some precautions.

I would love to see what they make of it, see if we really do have descendants that roam the stars as easily as we roam this world.

Now who's on another planet?

I'm a contented optimist.

That's probably the biggest difference between us...

 

[Toddy]

Oh indubitably this one is home

"Look for the agenda behind the propaganda"


" History repeats itself, it has to, no one listens the first time "

and unlike the Dodo, we're still stretching our wings

"This old world ain't so bad a place as somefolks try to make it,
But whether good, or whether bad, depends on how you take it"

I think as our 'developed' (sorry, horrible phrase, but it is understood) first world values, and benefits (like the mobile phones (and probably the concommitant rsi on that wonderful non ape opposible thumb ), but really, decent maternal and infant heatlth care becomes more widely diseminated, I firmly expect that populations will fall. The only real bar to it that I can see is religion; but from the first world example, folks seem to determine that quality of life matters over quantity of hungry offspring, regardless of their particular church's teaching.

And, on that note, Politics, Religion........it's definitely time to get back to the topic.

Global Warming.........I reckon it's a natural cycle but we're exacerbating it. I don't think we're going to stop doing so anytime soon, so we'd better get good at adapting to it.

cheers,
Toddy

 

[Bush Matt]

If we’d been around to see it we’d probably have been worrying about the plantlife invasion that was destroying the carbon based atmosphere and polluting it with oxygen.

I just wish they’d stop using the ‘science’ of global warming as an excuse to popularise conservation and environmental issues. Surely we can all agree that it’s a good thing to minimise human impact?

Overpopulation has to be the biggest cause but then I’m a great believer that natural selection and dynamics will catch up with us in the end! Our actions may accelerate - but I doubt that they dictate - the outcome.