Is Co2 really that bad.

[Pivot]

Very good point Peteski.

In addition, every small contribution of 7.6 billion humanoids on our planet adds-up, however, unless big business — who dwarfs our consumer energy consumption — get their act together, we are all toast!

Ref: http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

[Paul]

We all breathe out around 500 litres or 1kg of CO2 per day.....times 365.....x 7.6 billion......I make that 275 million tonnes of CO2 just by breathing!

Not quite sure what my point is () but if every one if these 7.6 billion humans is also aspiring to a TV, fridge, a car and an easy jet flight to Benidorm every year.......then we’re doomed!

[VanB]

In the last 50 years the world population has more than doubled. The likelihood is that, if unchecked, there could be nearly 20 billion humans on this planet in 50 years’ time. That will cause more damage on a planetary scale than anything currently being discussed

[Deleted User 1874]

In the last 50 years the world population has more than doubled. The likelihood is that, if unchecked, there could be nearly 20 billion humans on this planet in 50 years’ time. That will cause more damage on a planetary scale than anything currently being discussed

I can't remember which famous scientist said this, but to paraphrase "the earth is historically pretty good at shrugging off the environmental impact of any of its inhabitants - by making them extinct!" Humans have only been around for about a million years and could easily become extinct in the next million and there would be little or no trace of their previous existence after a few millennia. It's always been one of the big unknowns of the Drake equation (estimated number of intelligent life forms in the universe) i.e. how long can an intelligent technical civilisation realistically survive? Maybe the answer is implied in the lack of intelligent life so far observed outside of our own planet! The demise of the human race is almost inevitable, the only question is the time frame for its survival.

[Paul]

I can recommend “Inferno” by Dan Brown as a good New Year’s day read........

[Pivot]

On a more humorous note:

Ref: XKCD Comic on Twitter

[VanB]

In the last 50 years the world population has more than doubled. The likelihood is that, if unchecked, there could be nearly 20 billion humans on this planet in 50 years’ time. That will cause more damage on a planetary scale than anything currently being discussed

I can't remember which famous scientist said this, but to paraphrase "the earth is historically pretty good at shrugging off the environmental impact of any of its inhabitants - by making them extinct!" Humans have only been around for about a million years and could easily become extinct in the next million and there would be little or no trace of their previous existence after a few millennia. It's always been one of the big unknowns of the Drake equation (estimated number of intelligent life forms in the universe) i.e. how long can an intelligent technical civilisation realistically survive? Maybe the answer is implied in the lack of intelligent life so far observed outside of our own planet! The demise of the human race is almost inevitable, the only question is the time frame for its survival.

My point is that we are, as always, fucking about and worrying about the wrong things. Yes climate change is important but massively unimportant compared to population growth and the strain this will put on economies and resources even in the short to medium term.

[Deleted User 1874]

In the last 50 years the world population has more than doubled. The likelihood is that, if unchecked, there could be nearly 20 billion humans on this planet in 50 years’ time. That will cause more damage on a planetary scale than anything currently being discussed

I can't remember which famous scientist said this, but to paraphrase "the earth is historically pretty good at shrugging off the environmental impact of any of its inhabitants - by making them extinct!" Humans have only been around for about a million years and could easily become extinct in the next million and there would be little or no trace of their previous existence after a few millennia. It's always been one of the big unknowns of the Drake equation (estimated number of intelligent life forms in the universe) i.e. how long can an intelligent technical civilisation realistically survive? Maybe the answer is implied in the lack of intelligent life so far observed outside of our own planet! The demise of the human race is almost inevitable, the only question is the time frame for its survival.

My point is that we are, as always, fucking about and worrying about the wrong things. Yes climate change is important but massively unimportant compared to population growth and the strain this will put on economies and resources even in the short to medium term.

Maybe true, but are we then ONLY supposed to worry about what is arguably the worst thing i.e. global population growth? A more pragmatic approach is to do something about the things we realistically can in our first world bubble. Stuff like recycling, driving more eco friendly cars, making our homes and businesses more energy efficient etc. Individually these changes may not make any difference, but collectively they can at least improve our local environment over our own lifespan.

I think it's a weak argument to say that those things don't matter because there may be bigger underlying global issues we are effectively powerless to influence. I grew up following the demise of the north west cotton mill era and most of my recent ancestors who worked in that industry had poor health from the effects of local pollution. The sheer number of mill chimneys churning out smoke must have been horrific in those times. It was still bad enough growing up in the 70s.

Anyway my point about spiralling population growth is that at some point it will definitely end, one way or another. Either through starvation, disease, natural or man-made disaster or effective global politics (the least likely solution IMHO!). The earth itself will long outlive our human presence, especially in its current form.

[johnd]

My point is that we are, as always, fucking about and worrying about the wrong things. Yes climate change is important but massively unimportant compared to population growth and the strain this will put on economies and resources even in the short to medium term.

[I'm sure this really ought to be in OT chat but...]

Hmm, not sure I agree. Latest world population projections I've seen are for a 50% increase by 2100 (https://ourworldindata.org/world-population-growth). That's certainly a substantial increase and, given that the increase is likely to be disproportionately in the poorer parts of the world, is absolutely going to increase migration and economic pressures.

But it's 'only' something like a 15% increase in the time-frame to 2050/2060 which ought to be manageable in terms of food and energy supply. But that same time-frame is critical to prevent serious climate change. If the world hasn't put the lid on CO2 emissions by eg 2060 then runaway climate change seems almost inevitable. Remember that there's reckoned to be something like a 40-year lag (if not more) between new/excess CO2 emissions and the resulting maximum impact on climate being seen. So i'd argue that climate change is absolutely the #1 priority.

[VanB]

As we heard on Dad’s army “we’re doomed, Captain Mainwaring, we’re doomed”

We are too late to have a material effect on global warming in the foreseeable future and, whatever measures we undertake, we will overshoot the targets set by governments. The horse has well and truly bolted!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk