Environment & Energy

Gregorian

(23,867 posts)

29. It's pretty obvious.

Wed Jul 11, 2012, 12:51 PM

Jul 2012

If the equation has two parts, users and what they're using, and growth is essentially exponential, then even altering use is not effective over even a short period of time. And that is only with respect to fossil fuel.

The real issues that make an even stronger case for population decrease are the food, water, medical... And even those have components of fossil fuel use. 1% of our energy use alone goes into manufacturing nitrogen for soil amendment.

So we can call it "green" and feel like we've accomplished something, only to have it wiped out in 20 years. Renewable energy is only part of this equation.

I may not have been clear on something. There is a reason we're pumping nitrogen into our soil. We can argue about that. But as it is, ocean acidification may be our biggest problem. And that is due to, you guessed it, too many mouths.

Why not try another billion people. What do you think that's going to be like?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

42 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Ocean Acidification Is Climate Change's 'Equally Evil Twin,' NOAA Chief Says [View all] kristopher Jul 2012 OP

We are talking about pH here RobertEarl Jul 2012 #1

What's your point? The Doctor. Jul 2012 #3

Temps go up pH goes down, I wrote RobertEarl Jul 2012 #5

You're not the sharpest bulb on the chandelier, are ya? The Doctor. Jul 2012 #33

Hey Doc RobertEarl Jul 2012 #34

Yeah, pretty much what I figured. The Doctor. Jul 2012 #35

The oceans are heating at a rate of 190k 1GW nuclear power plants... joshcryer Jul 2012 #7

Ummmm RobertEarl Jul 2012 #8

Oops, my bad. I phrased that inaccurately. Here's Wikipedia's page: joshcryer Jul 2012 #9

Wikipedia says 7.5 to 8.4 for the pH of seawater <nt> caraher Jul 2012 #10

Thanks RobertEarl Jul 2012 #11

Which is why there are warm, basic pools in the southwest XemaSab Jul 2012 #24

We're in very deep shit. The Doctor. Jul 2012 #2

All of us here have lived to see the beginning of the catastrophe. GliderGuider Jul 2012 #4

Yep. joshcryer Jul 2012 #6

Acidification is increasing at ten times the rate that preceded the Paleocene-Eocene mass extinction GliderGuider Jul 2012 #12

And to think, much of it could have been prevented. limpyhobbler Jul 2012 #13

We had plenty of warning, but GliderGuider Jul 2012 #14

What you see is what you get pscot Jul 2012 #15

"Party on Wayne!" GliderGuider Jul 2012 #16

I think maybe limpyhobbler Jul 2012 #19

Try 50 years ago dipsydoodle Jul 2012 #26

"Could" it have been prevented? The Doctor. Jul 2012 #36

Hmm. My answer is a resounding and absolute "No". GliderGuider Jul 2012 #38

You are confusing 'possible' with 'probable'. The Doctor. Jul 2012 #39

Actually, the reason why it was not prevented is very simple. GliderGuider Jul 2012 #40

Haven't we seen this before? RobertEarl Jul 2012 #41

There's also this possibility GliderGuider Jul 2012 #42

Are we ever going to really talk about world population? Gregorian Jul 2012 #17

No one is stopping you. What do you want to say? kristopher Jul 2012 #18

It's pretty obvious. Gregorian Jul 2012 #29

I was actually wanting to hear where you go from there kristopher Jul 2012 #30

Don't worry, the population will be finding itself savagely reduced soon enough. The Doctor. Jul 2012 #37

Get real RobertEarl Jul 2012 #20

If we all lived like the people in India did... GliderGuider Jul 2012 #21

Can't blame Indians RobertEarl Jul 2012 #22

To expand on that idea a bit more GliderGuider Jul 2012 #23

Just picking up on one phrase there ... Nihil Jul 2012 #25

Yes, you've put your finger on the problem. GliderGuider Jul 2012 #27

There was a documentary made about this problem NickB79 Jul 2012 #31

Don't be disingenuous, we're talking about modern living here. Gregorian Jul 2012 #28

disingenuous? RobertEarl Jul 2012 #32