People need to face the facts.

[rabbitweed]

It seems very, very few people can face the fact that we're going to have to drastically reduce our energy consumption.

It also amazes me how for so many people this boils down to "looming energy crisis = omg now I won't be able to drive my car!1!!! I GUESS I'LL JUST USE HYDROGEN!!E!@!".

Being able to continue to use private motor vechiles should be the least of your conceren.

[Slave of the Beast]

In the 70's we were all going to freeze, in the 80's we were all going to die from carcinogenic UV light coming through the growing Ozone holes, from the 90's onwards we're all going to burn, drown and starve from globally warming induced forest fires, ice melting and famine.

Personally I blame Jesus.

Ever since he got nailed to that plank of wood, people have been expecting him to pop up, kill Satan and then have a 1000yr long afterparty. It's obviously never happened, as I play cards with Satan every second friday of the month. What has happened, I think, is that the mentality of 'it's just around the corner' has pervasively seeped into all the dark crevices of the collective Christian psyche. So, just as the false prophets before them, the latest crop of doom mongers would have us believe that whilst all the other preceding prophecies of woe and misery have repeatedly failed to materialize, this time IT'S THE REAL DEAL!

And we lap it up, because there's nothing quite like the feeling of impending doom to spice up your otherwise mundane life. And as good Christian-heritage westerners, we're psychologically primed for just such a cataclysmic event. Sure, things will change, but then things have never stopped changing.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to sponsor some starving carbon neutral Africans in order to salve my self-loathing conscience.

[rabbitweed]

Meh, the fact is shit's going to happen no matter what I do about it. I just 1. don't want to contribute and 2. be in a much better position to deal with the change.

And seriously, people posting here need to forget about trying to find the solution to replacing fossil fuel powered private cars, as we already have one: it's called living closer to shit and getting off your ass.

[Trousersnake]

I think I got the arse at the wrong time.

I'm personally concerned about things like pesticides, filthy rodents are going to eat everything and kill us all one day.

[Slave of the Beast]

I think I got the arse at the wrong time.

This expression intrigues me.

[gforce]

I think the biggest question here is that even if we all drastically cut out energy consumption would the earth still be able to sustainably support a population of 6-7 billion humans? My thoughts are no. We need to face the facts that there isn't enough room in this world for all of us.

[mayor of monkey town]

I love the idea of mining the moon or other planets....

I probably wont see it in my lifetime, but i do believe that im going to see severe climate change and the effects of it.

People are so comfortable that its impossible to imagine shit going crazy - people have such faith in the institutions of the world, churches, governments, businesses that they will do what they are told.

People will face the facts when they're forced to, and it wont be pretty.

I predict food shortages, for everyone.

Theres a russian proverb that i love -
Once the workers starve the rich can eat their money.

[Blackwell]

I think the biggest question here is that even if we all drastically cut out energy consumption would the earth still be able to sustainably support a population of 6-7 billion humans? My thoughts are no. We need to face the facts that there isn't enough room in this world for all of us.

Except there is. Most places in the world are able to support their populations comfortably. The earth, as far as space and land for agriculture we're quite peachy. We might be producing lots of pollution and straining our resources but the idea that we there "isn't enough room in this world for all of us" is unfounded.

[gforce]

Except there is. Most places in the world are able to support their populations comfortably. The earth, as far as space and land for agriculture we're quite peachy. We might be producing lots of pollution and straining our resources but the idea that we there "isn't enough room in this world for all of us" is unfounded.

yes but the way we produce our food through agriculture is unsustainable in it's self. Not to mention the millions of acres that depend on irrigation and that may be lost due to climate change.

Anyway that wasn't my main point. my main point was that most people don't want to go living back in the stoneage using very very few resources and only just surviving. To continue some sort of reasonably advanced civilisation sustainably we will need less people around. The world can only produce X amount of resources and a million people using these resources are going to have a better quality of life than say 10million using these resources.


When you say most countries are able to support themselves, in what areas do you mean? Food? Energy? I think very few countries can support them selves sustainably in these areas.
Anyway im sure if we all become permaculture loving vegans than we could literally feed the world but thats not going to happen.

[Serge163]

I love the idea of mining the moon or other planets....

I probably wont see it in my lifetime, but i do believe that im going to see severe climate change and the effects of it.

People are so comfortable that its impossible to imagine shit going crazy - people have such faith in the institutions of the world, churches, governments, businesses that they will do what they are told.

People will face the facts when they're forced to, and it wont be pretty.

I predict food shortages, for everyone.

Theres a russian proverb that i love -
Once the workers starve the rich can eat their money.


They say we're already mining the moon. You people need to wake up and realize that we will never ever run out of energy. Nothing bad will happen to the human race ever. I don't want to go into detail. But look, if I'm wrong than in the next five years we will be in depressiong. But that will never happen, contact me in five years if I'm wrong and I'll give you a grand, but it will never ever happen.

[gforce]

They say we're already mining the moon. You people need to wake up and realize that we will never ever run out of energy. Nothing bad will happen to the human race ever. I don't want to go into detail. But look, if I'm wrong than in the next five years we will be in depressiong. But that will never happen, contact me in five years if I'm wrong and I'll give you a grand, but it will never ever happen.


do you pay by cash, cheque or card?

[boozehound420]

I will simply find the cheapest way for me to make a living. The least amount of gas to get to work and back etc. This comes natural as the price for fossil fuels will continue to rise untill we have none left. I will always stick with the cheapest method. Our only hope is the economy, capitalism and the government will work out and the switch with be affordable, not collapse the economy and not cost too much tax dollars.

[Dark_Magneto]

You people need to wake up and realize that we will never ever run out of energy. Nothing bad will happen to the human race ever.

And nobody will every die after 2020 because the technological singularity will have invented a cure to death and then go on to defeat entropy.

What a wonderfully unsupported extraordinary assertion.

If history is any indication, bad shit happens to living things all the time, and humans haven't magically become some kind of exception.

Arithmetic (http://media.globalpublicmedia.com/RAM/2004/08/AlbertBartlett20040829.ram) doesn't cease to apply because of what one might think. We still have an exponentially growing population consuming an exponentially growing amount of finite resources. We are the most unsustainable species (http://dieoff.org/synopsis.htm) this planet has ever harbored and nothing we've done or are doing is in any position to alter that in any meaningful or significant capacity.

Of the earth’s estimated 10 million species, 300,000 have vanished in the past fifty years. Each year, 3,000 to 30,000 species become extinct, an all-time high for the last 65 million years. Within 100 years, between 1/3 and 2/3 of all birds, animals, plants, and other species will be dead. Nearly 25% of the 4,630 known mammal species are now threatened with extinction, along with 34% of fish, 25% of amphibians, 20% of reptiles, and 11% of birds. Even more species are having population decline. Environmental scientists speak of an "Omega Point" at which the vast interconnected networks of Earth’s ecologies are so weakened that human existence is no longer possible.

Past estimates of the long-term carrying capacity of Earth relied heavily on relatively optimistic assumptions about consumption, technologies, and equity (A x T), are in the vicinity of 2 billion people. We're already around 250% over that. The population of today cann't be sustained on the 'interest' that is generated by natural ecosystems, but is consuming its vast supply of natural capital - particularly deep, rich agricultural soils, 'fossil' groundwater, and biodiversity - accumulated over centuries to eons. In some places soils, which are generated on a time scale of centimeters per century are disappearing at rates of centimeters per year and major aquifers are being depleted at dozens of times their recharge rates.

http://www.ohiopeakoilaction.org/threats-environmentaldestruction_clip_image005.jpg

Simply put, we've embarked on the greatest extinction episode in 65 million years (http://www.ohiopeakoilaction.org/threats-environmentaldestruction.html).

If we don't control our own population, then nature will do it. In order to remedy the problem, we have to address population (http://media.globalpublicmedia.com/RM/2007/06/AlBartlett20070622.1.mp3). I'm confident that even though we're the only species that can choose to voluntarily reduce our population, we won't elect to do so. So being unwilling to address the issue ourselves (the only viable option available to us), we'll just have to see what cruel and brutal methods nature has in store for us.

[rabbitweed]

I will simply find the cheapest way for me to make a living. The least amount of gas to get to work and back etc.

:lol:

You just don't get it do you?

[Dark_Magneto]

That's the most you can do, but the fact is that since no renewable energy platform even has the potential to replace more than a mere fraction of what we're now getting, the available energy will constantly decline. What's worse, since we don't have those systems established now in an era of cheap energy and a robust economy, we're not going to get them in an era of prohibitively expensive energy and a tanked economy, as the window of opportunity will have been squandered.

In that scenario, you won't even have a job. The fabric of society itself will unravel as we revert back to medieval capabilities with a population much greater than can be supported.

Ever seen Mad Max? People killing over food and fuel would become the norm. People will resort to eating their pets and cannibalism just to stay alive, and the suburbs will become the great graveyards of the 21'st century.

Then you gotta factor that on top of global warming and the survivors killing every animal and burning every tree in sight. Assuming we don't kill each other in a nuclear exchange fighting over the last remains of the stuff (War in the Middle East with 2/3rds of what remains. It's why we're there now, of course) then it's gonna be hard enough just to eek out an existence.

If you manage to be one of the survivors, you won't have any of the modern luxuries and entertainment of today, but life will certainly be more 'interesting'.

Personally, I'm glad that I live in the time that I do. We get to witness the peak of human civilization. We get to see the apex of technology. We get to see the utmost heights that science and innovation will ever achieve. I'd say that's reason enough to be satisfied with the times in which we live.

But yeah, that's the size of it. It's not going to be an issue of how to get to work, it's going to be an issue of where your food and water come from, and if you're alive, how to protect it from raiders.

[Sententiae]

Arithmetic (http://media.globalpublicmedia.com/RAM/2004/08/AlbertBartlett20040829.ram) doesn't cease to apply because of what one might think.

Since when?!


You people need to wake up and realize that we will never ever run out of energy. Nothing bad will happen to the human race ever.

Obviously, we'll never run into any problem, because no life on this planet have ever encountered any. There have never been mass extinctions of a species. And there have certainly never been any problems caused by a change in weather patterns.


I don't want to go into detail.

Can you?

[DocShay]

"People need to face the facts."


People won't do shit until something directly affects there way of life.

So far global warming, fossil fuel depletion ect, has not really done much to the average joe except make us complain about higher gas prices.

[gforce]

People won't do shit until something directly affects there way of life.

So far global warming, fossil fuel depletion ect, has not really done much to the average joe except make us complain about higher gas prices.

most average people won't ever accept that we are limited by nature. The media/government will spread lies that a miracle is just around the corner or that declines are due to those pesky arabs :rolleyes:

It's already happening with the word on hydrogen 'fuel' and ethanol/biofuels

[glutamate antagonist]

In the 70's we were all going to freeze, in the 80's we were all going to die from carcinogenic UV light coming through the growing Ozone holes, from the 90's onwards we're all going to burn, drown and starve from globally warming induced forest fires, ice melting and famine.

Personally I blame Jesus.

Ever since he got nailed to that plank of wood, people have been expecting him to pop up, kill Satan and then have a 1000yr long afterparty. It's obviously never happened, as I play cards with Satan every second friday of the month. What has happened, I think, is that the mentality of 'it's just around the corner' has pervasively seeped into all the dark crevices of the collective Christian psyche. So, just as the false prophets before them, the latest crop of doom mongers would have us believe that whilst all the other preceding prophecies of woe and misery have repeatedly failed to materialize, this time IT'S THE REAL DEAL!

And we lap it up, because there's nothing quite like the feeling of impending doom to spice up your otherwise mundane life. And as good Christian-heritage westerners, we're psychologically primed for just such a cataclysmic event. Sure, things will change, but then things have never stopped changing.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to sponsor some starving carbon neutral Africans in order to salve my self-loathing conscience.

Best. Post. Ever.

[among_the_living]

Humans can try to save the earth from warming if they want, they can do whatever it takes to try to be all important but the fact of the matter is that humans can not cool down the sun, which, is causing most of the warming.

If the whole solar system is getting hotter, turning off your fucking tv and not using a car isnt going to do a lot at all.

[Sententiae]

It's not just the solar system getting hotter. Although that is a factor, it doesn't account for the rapid changes we're seeing. So, turning off some stuff and carpooling, and hopefully switching to alternative fuel sources to take some of the burden off fossil fuels will do alot.

Eventually the sun will be a red giant with it's circumference at earths orbit, so assuming the earth doesn't get pulled by some miracle, it'll still be incinerated eventually.

That still doesn't mean I want to keep my quality of life pretty high while I'm around.

[rabbitweed]

Humans can try to save the earth from warming if they want, they can do whatever it takes to try to be all important but the fact of the matter is that humans can not cool down the sun, which, is causing most of the warming.

If the whole solar system is getting hotter, turning off your fucking tv and not using a car isnt going to do a lot at all.

It's not about global warming. it's about running out of useable hydrocarbons.

[SafeAsMilk]

...capitalism and the government will work...

What?

[supermassivefuntime]

In the 70's we were all going to freeze, in the 80's we were all going to die from carcinogenic UV light coming through the growing Ozone holes, from the 90's onwards we're all going to burn, drown and starve from globally warming induced forest fires, ice melting and famine.

Personally I blame Jesus.

Ever since he got nailed to that plank of wood, people have been expecting him to pop up, kill Satan and then have a 1000yr long afterparty. It's obviously never happened, as I play cards with Satan every second friday of the month. What has happened, I think, is that the mentality of 'it's just around the corner' has pervasively seeped into all the dark crevices of the collective Christian psyche. So, just as the false prophets before them, the latest crop of doom mongers would have us believe that whilst all the other preceding prophecies of woe and misery have repeatedly failed to materialize, this time IT'S THE REAL DEAL!

And we lap it up, because there's nothing quite like the feeling of impending doom to spice up your otherwise mundane life. And as good Christian-heritage westerners, we're psychologically primed for just such a cataclysmic event. Sure, things will change, but then things have never stopped changing.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to sponsor some starving carbon neutral Africans in order to salve my self-loathing conscience.

ah whatever. we'll be dead before the really bad shit happens. in the mean time....mmm gotta love the smell of exhaust in the morning.

[moonmeister]

Personally I blame Jesus.

Ever since he got nailed to that plank of wood, people have been expecting him to pop up, kill Satan and then have a 1000yr long afterparty.

Well? We've all got 'Pop-up' Blocking now days don't we? :eek:

[Slave of the Beast]

True. How I will laugh come Judgement Day.

[Soda_Can_Sniper]

Obviously, we'll never run into any problem, because no life on this planet have ever encountered any. There have never been mass extinctions of a species. And there have certainly never been any problems caused by a change in weather patterns.

Not true, in fact, quite the opposite. Through Earth's small lifespan thus far, there have been several large categorized extinction periods, and some say we're on the verge of another because of Man. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event

Man could solve all his problems if he'd suck it up and not be such a greedy bastard. Funneling resources into fusion reactors WILL produce results, as they are already very close, and it solves almost all energy problems. Couple that with increased research into solar collectors for the consumer market and a conservative lifestyle, the shift into thermonuclear power will be painless and win-win for all.

My only two fears are that once man has such technology, of course, he'll revert to the greedy nigger he is, and keep the world in the state it's in, or with such an abudant resource, waste everything he comes into contact with.

Conservation isn't a hippie idea; it should be a lifestyle, because there could be a day when chance rips your world apart, and only the fact that you didn't mercilessly abuse and destroy what you had will be what keeps you alive.

[Moonius]

Cmon guyz, everyone knowz that the aliens are gunna come n save us n stuff

[among_the_living]

If we run out, which we wont for a while it will push us to invent ways of creating energy.

Once you run out of everything we will have to,which will be better for the earth anyway.

[Eat A Queer Fetus For Jesus]

Lol, Soda_Can_Sniper can't understand sarcasm. You must be an ass pie. Ass pies are fucking annoying. get the fuck out.:mad::mad::mad::mad:

[gforce]

If we run out, which we wont for a while it will push us to invent ways of creating energy.

Once you run out of everything we will have to,which will be better for the earth anyway.

The law of conservation of energy states that energy cannot be 'created'.


Theres an old american indian saying that goes 'only when the white man has cut the last tree and caught the last fish will he learn you can not eat money'

[Slave of the Beast]

The law of conservation of energy states that energy cannot be 'created'. And once we 'run' out of everything how we will build a vehicle capable of transporting humans to a suitable planet?

I believe he's referring only to non-renewable energy sources. If so the law of conservation of energy doesn't apply to his statement.

[gforce]

I believe he's referring only to non-renewable energy sources. If so the law of conservation of energy doesn't apply to his statement.


well obviously the law does still apply in principle to any energy. Alternatives and non renewables still have to obey this law even though some people still believe in various alternatives which to prove effective and be an actual 'source' of energy (eg the large scale hydrogen economy proposed) would not.

And i did gather that he meant alternative sources not that we were going to create energy by making a new universe in a lab and extracting the energy from it or something.. :D I was just pointing out that saying we are going to create energy is totally wrong.

[Slave of the Beast]

well obviously the law does still apply in principle to any energy. Alternatives and non renewables still have to obey this law even though some people still believe in various alternatives which to prove effective and be an actual 'source' of energy (eg the large scale hydrogen economy proposed) would not.

In this case we're talking about it's application within a system. One in which you'd assumed that all energy resources had been depleted. Which unless the Sun stops burning is unlikely, i.e. invoking it is not relevant in the sense that no one will be attempting to break it.

In any case, I believe he meant "creating" energy from matter or the ecosystem, just via novel methods. 'Generating' would have been more appropriate.

[hazode]

if anything blame the cows they burp and fart methane which wrecks the ozone and contributes to greenhouse gases. where as only 1 in 10 people fart methane so there.

[gforce]

if anything blame the cows they burp and fart methane which wrecks the ozone and contributes to greenhouse gases. where as only 1 in 10 people fart methane so there.

Actually livestock accounts for 40% of all methane emissions and as methane is 23 times greater in strength as a greenhouse gas it does account for quite a sizeable chunk of the overall warming caused by humans

[Jove]

In the 70's we were all going to freeze, in the 80's we were all going to die from carcinogenic UV light coming through the growing Ozone holes, from the 90's onwards we're all going to burn, drown and starve from globally warming induced forest fires, ice melting and famine.

Personally I blame Jesus.

Ever since he got nailed to that plank of wood, people have been expecting him to pop up, kill Satan and then have a 1000yr long afterparty. It's obviously never happened, as I play cards with Satan every second friday of the month. What has happened, I think, is that the mentality of 'it's just around the corner' has pervasively seeped into all the dark crevices of the collective Christian psyche. So, just as the false prophets before them, the latest crop of doom mongers would have us believe that whilst all the other preceding prophecies of woe and misery have repeatedly failed to materialize, this time IT'S THE REAL DEAL!

And we lap it up, because there's nothing quite like the feeling of impending doom to spice up your otherwise mundane life. And as good Christian-heritage westerners, we're psychologically primed for just such a cataclysmic event. Sure, things will change, but then things have never stopped changing.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to sponsor some starving carbon neutral Africans in order to salve my self-loathing conscience.

Excellent post....

[Dark_Magneto]

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to subsidize the carrying capacity of some third world hellhole already in overshoot...


Fixed.

[rabbitweed]

If we run out, which we wont for a while it will push us to invent ways of creating energy.

Once you run out of everything we will have to,which will be better for the earth anyway.

Yeah, just relax, when we run out of hydrocarbons we'll just use the mysterious "other" source of fuel. Nothing will change!

Hooray for naievity!

[Dark_Magneto]

Not to mention the crisis has long-since resolved well before the earth can be considered to have "run out" for all practical intents.

The issue, rather, is when production declines, as it has recently been doing. That's where the real trouble starts.

[boozehound420]

:lol:

You just don't get it do you?
What I wrote was what my plan is for right now. Not once the world is fucked. What are you planning on doing?

I quite one job and found a job thats a 10km commute there and back. I spend 45$ a month on gas. Where before i was spending 200$+. So I just reduced my burning of fossil fuels by 75% doing that. What type of effort have you made?

I personaly cant do anything to bring new technology to the table. Although local people around me are.

Theres one company who are on there 3rd model I believe, on an underwater turbine that uses ocean currents to turn a turbine. Moving water is alot more efficient in producing energy then wind.

Another company has put the plans in motion to build a buoy system where the bottom of it is attached to the ocean floor, and when the buoy moves up and down it moves a pyston, which moves water, the water moves a turbine at the top.

So the quest to "save the planet" and high profits for new technology is working, give it time.

Although thats assuming we're causing global warming and stopping the burning of fossil fuels will change anythign. Which I highly doubt it will, but atleast we wont be useing fossil fuels anymore.

[Philanthropy]

when energy runs out im gona start breakdancing. dont know why. just will

[gforce]

What I wrote was what my plan is for right now. Not once the world is fucked. What are you planning on doing?

I quite one job and found a job thats a 10km commute there and back. I spend 45$ a month on gas. Where before i was spending 200$+. So I just reduced my burning of fossil fuels by 75% doing that. What type of effort have you made?

I personaly cant do anything to bring new technology to the table. Although local people around me are.

Theres one company who are on there 3rd model I believe, on an underwater turbine that uses ocean currents to turn a turbine. Moving water is alot more efficient in producing energy then wind.

Another company has put the plans in motion to build a buoy system where the bottom of it is attached to the ocean floor, and when the buoy moves up and down it moves a pyston, which moves water, the water moves a turbine at the top.

So the quest to "save the planet" and high profits for new technology is working, give it time.

Although thats assuming we're causing global warming and stopping the burning of fossil fuels will change anythign. Which I highly doubt it will, but atleast we wont be useing fossil fuels anymore.

but what happens when the price of petrol increases to say $10 a gallon? Your commute doubles in cost and not only that everything else goes up in price aswell as oil/NG is used in every sector of the economy. Not everyone can move that close to their work but what happens when their is a physical shortage of oil not just the price goes up?

No amount of wind turbines and solar cells or tidal schemes that we can even conceivably build will allow us to continue without fairly major disruptions in life let alone carrying on unabrupted. The time to start a transition came and went 20 years ago. We are facing a oil crisis (aswell as a concoction of other converging disasters) in the coming years which have already started and people are more worried about what they are going to be driving not how they are going to pay the mortage on the house or even feed their family's.

[Greatjob]

we should face it but wont its going to get very bad and no one will do shit
then it will hit rock bottom and we'll put all our time into it and come up with something

[eXo5]

personally... i'd like to say i'm all in favor for steam energy... i think itll solve our water issues as well xD a lot of people might just really really fucking wasted instead though.. hmm xDD

[Slave of the Beast]

personally... i'd like to say i'm all in favor for steam energy... i think itll solve our water issues as well xD a lot of people might just really really fucking wasted instead though.. hmm xDD

What?

[rabbitweed]

What type of effort have you made?

I walk or cycle everywhere.

If you think using a giant metal cage to travel 10kms isn't grotesquely wasteful in the grand scheme of things, you're deluding yourself.

[rabbitweed]

but what happens when the price of petrol increases to say $10 a gallon? Your commute doubles in cost and not only that everything else goes up in price aswell as oil/NG is used in every sector of the economy. Not everyone can move that close to their work but what happens when their is a physical shortage of oil not just the price goes up?

No amount of wind turbines and solar cells or tidal schemes that we can even conceivably build will allow us to continue without fairly major disruptions in life let alone carrying on unabrupted. The time to start a transition came and went 20 years ago. We are facing a oil crisis (aswell as a concoction of other converging disasters) in the coming years which have already started and people are more worried about what they are going to be driving not how they are going to pay the mortage on the house or even feed their family's.

FINALLY SOMEONE WHO GETS IT. You expressed it better than I ever could.

[coolwestman]

This is one of the best threads I've read in a while.

www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net is a good site to read up on this stuff if anyone is interested. I've been thinking about taking a BOSS survival course soon.

[Philanthropy]

bets are everything will turn electrical

and if and when that depletes i say bring the horse back

oh yeah medieval styles

[Dark_Magneto]

Medieval methods of survival mean that we have to dump a good 80% of the human population or so.

[Philanthropy]

no man i meant horses as just a replacement for cars

not 1200's France man

[gforce]

no man i meant horses as just a replacement for cars

not 1200's France man

how you going to feed the horses?

[Dark_Magneto]

no man i meant horses as just a replacement for cars

not 1200's France man

There are a quarter of a billion autos just in the U.S. alone.

Totally impractical.

[Philanthropy]

well go suck a dick then Mr. President

[Slave of the Beast]

There are a quarter of a billion autos just in the U.S. alone.

Totally impractical.

Americans will just have to rediscover what their legs are for.

[gforce]

Americans will just have to rediscover what their legs are for.



so we can walk at 60miles an hour?

[Slave of the Beast]

so we can walk at 60miles an hour?

Yes, that should be fairly obvious I'd think, seeing as the average distance to the nearest grocery store in major urban areas is about 80 miles.

[ArgonPlasma2000]

so we can walk at 60miles an hour?

Interestingly enough a recent study found that driving everywhere is easier on the environment as opposed to walking because of the emmisions of the agriculture industry.

[Blackwell]

Interestingly enough a recent study found that driving everywhere is easier on the environment as opposed to walking because of the emmisions of the agriculture industry.

If you could link me to the source I'd appreciate it.

[boozehound420]

I walk or cycle everywhere.

If you think using a giant metal cage to travel 10kms isn't grotesquely wasteful in the grand scheme of things, you're deluding yourself.

I bike during the summer. Its just starting to be dark at 6 in the morning so I will start driving again. Its not safe on these roads in the dark, on a bike. Plus its BC, and the rain is coming.

And in the grand scheme of things my pinner 50 litres of gas a month is nothing.

[ArgonPlasma2000]

If you could link me to the source I'd appreciate it.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article2195538.ece

I would have linked at first but it was hard to find it.

[Blackwell]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article2195538.ece

I would have linked at first but it was hard to find it.

Thanks

[gforce]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article2195538.ece

I would have linked at first but it was hard to find it.

I saw that article when it first came out. It presumes that the energy expended is got back through only eating beef or milk (one of if not the most energy intensive form of food production). I imagine the results would be in favour of walking if the food was a more realistic diet as no one eats 100% meat. Although it does do a good job of demonstrating that not everything that appears 'green' is 'green'.

[rabbitweed]

I bike during the summer. Its just starting to be dark at 6 in the morning so I will start driving again. Its not safe on these roads in the dark, on a bike. Plus its BC, and the rain is coming.

I cycle in the dark very often and have never had a problem. I wear a bright front and rear light and a flurouscent vest. I actually consider it safer than biking during the day... just make sure you don't keep too close to gutter so you're visibile

Then again I don't live in your area.

I also don't find rain a big deal, it's getting out there that sucks, but on these roads I am too busy paying attention to traffic to notice how wet I am. A good jacket and mudguards help.

[rabbitweed]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article2195538.ece

I would have linked at first but it was hard to find it.

I remember that article. it's ridiculous. It would somewhat apply if we ate only japanese beef...but it still doesn't take into account so many things.

[ArgonPlasma2000]

Its basing it off the average American diet. Its not unrealistic except for a small part of the population of the world.

True enough that it doesnt take into account for things such as veggies and whatnot, but those veggies dont give you anywhere close to the amount of energy meat and processed foods do.

Who gets fat? someone who eats hamburgers or a flower-power carrot munching hippy?

[Slave of the Beast]

Its basing it off the average American diet. Its not unrealistic except for a small part of the population of the world.

And which small part would that be?

[gforce]

Its basing it off the average American diet. Its not unrealistic except for a small part of the population of the world.


"...based on the greenhouse gases created by intensive beef production. “Driving a typical UK car for 3 miles [4.8km] adds about 0.9 kg [2lb] of CO2 to the atmosphere,” he said, a calculation based on the Government’s official fuel emission figures. “If you walked instead, it would use about 180 calories. You’d need about 100g of beef to replace those calories, resulting in 3.6kg of emissions, or four times as much as driving."

And although vegatables and fruits don't supply as much energy per 100g they produce way less CO2/methane in their production. Incidentally 100g of bread would supply more energy than that of beef.

[ArgonPlasma2000]

And which small part would that be?

Several Soviet bloc countries, several countries south of the USA, and most of Africa, and most of the poorer Asian countries. Basically the shitty rural countries.

And although vegatables and fruits don't supply as much energy per 100g they produce way less CO2/methane in their production. Incidentally 100g of bread would supply more energy than that of beef.

Vegetables need refrigeration just as meats. It also takes alot of energy just to harvest it (one of the MAJOR drawbacks of biofuels).

[gforce]

Vegetables need refrigeration just as meats. It also takes alot of energy just to harvest it (one of the MAJOR drawbacks of biofuels).

since when do you refrigerate apples, potatos, carrots etc..??

[PokingSmot]

Coming back to the main argument...

"In the 70's we were all going to freeze, in the 80's we were all going to die from carcinogenic UV light coming through the growing Ozone holes, from the 90's onwards we're all going to burn, drown and starve from globally warming induced forest fires, ice melting and famine.

Personally I blame Jesus."

Personally I don't blame Jesus, he was an awesome dude: 1. He's got wine wherever there's water, 2. He resembles a hippie, 3. He was invented in the 60s... think about it: He's born, he lives like 20 some odd years, meanwhile his buddies have written up a book about these madtrips, then you have to wait to get it published, could take a few decades down the generations before a carpenter can a Bible published. Score one for Jesus' New Testament. The only problem was, he was too bent to realize that claiming to be the son of God was quite the badass thing to do at the time... so they nailed him to a cross.

God however... he's doing a pretty bad job up there honestly...



That bastard.

[panthermodern]

And seriously, people posting here need to forget about trying to find the solution to replacing fossil fuel powered private cars, as we already have one: it's called living closer to shit and getting off your ass.

Well, that's all fine and dandy if you live in the city, but what about people in remote rural areas. Face it there will always be private cars. Plus, how will I get to national parks to go hiking without one? You can't appreciate nature being stuck in a city.

The thing is though, for city dwellers, I agree with you. Urban sprawl and automobile dependance needs to stop. Electric vehicles are the future. When the Chevy Volt is realeased in 2010, if I have the finances to purchase one, I will. However, these won't stop urban sprawl, and that is where government needs to stand up for the people and the environment and put their foot down. Public transit is a good choice in cities, as well as cycling, walking, etc.

I don't think private vehicles are a bad thing for long distance trips, as long as they use environmentally friendly technology, such as batteries being charged by solar power, etc. It's just that we need to be less dependent on them. Tearing up the highways and eliminating private vehicles would be foolish, to say the least, as well as a blow to freedom, because presumably government-controlled public transit would completely take over, giving the government complete control over the free movement of individuals.

We just need to use our heads when it comes to transportation, that's all.

[Cullz]

Actually, it doesn't need to take that much energy to produce food. Modern agriculture is a failing equation. We put in energy and get food, but it destroys the land. It is extremely inefficient, because we focus on monoculture farming (big areas of one crop).

Sensible agriculture involves mixed cropping and sensible soil management. The yields are diverse, ideal for local supply, human employment instead of enormous energy inputs, and the land improves or at least doesn't become degraded. This means in a 100 years, we can still farm in the same place, and it wont be a desert. This applies to grazing, and non food crops as well as agricultural cropping.

Localizing agriculture greatly reduces transport costs.

[gforce]

Actually, it doesn't need to take that much energy to produce food. Modern agriculture is a failing equation. We put in energy and get food, but it destroys the land. It is extremely inefficient, because we focus on monoculture farming (big areas of one crop).

Sensible agriculture involves mixed cropping and sensible soil management. The yields are diverse, ideal for local supply, human employment instead of enormous energy inputs, and the land improves or at least doesn't become degraded. This means in a 100 years, we can still farm in the same place, and it wont be a desert. This applies to grazing, and non food crops as well as agricultural cropping.

Localizing agriculture greatly reduces transport costs.

Good ideas,
But as you said Industrial scale agriculture only works because we have massive fields of monoculture crops. Because of this we can use machines to collect the crops easily. However if you have a mixed field with a bit of wheat, some corn, beans, potatos, carrots etc.. you can't use a machine to pick them because it's hard to differentiate between the different varieties. So you need to go back to human labour, this is comparatively more expensive hence cost of food increases. As well as this more people have to be employed in the sector as a whole as 1 person can't collect as much as a combine harvester in a day. How many people have you spoken to who want to be a farmer?

The issue of soil deteriation is one thats going (and already is) to bite us. Higher energy costs = higher fertiliser costs = higher food prices. Ok an annoyance in MEDC's but in places like Africa or Asia it could cause massive reductions in the yield of crops.

[nicky69]

how much change does one make if he gives up meat?

[gforce]

how much change does one make if he gives up meat?

quite a lot if your the average person, especially if you move towards then growing/buying locally etc..

In ideal conditions it can take as little as 5000 sq ft of land to feed a vegan, about 1/2 to 1 acre to feed a vegetarian and 5+ acres for a diet with lots of meat in.

The wikipedia aticle sums things up quite nicely.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_vegetarianism

It is worth saying though that a meat diet can be more environmental sound than a vegetarian diet if done correctly.

[Cullz]

Originally posted by gforce
Good ideas,
But as you said Industrial scale agriculture only works because we have massive fields of monoculture crops.

Well, it really doesn't work, because it destroys the land. But the reason it produces food so well is also because of fertilizer inputs, fossil fuel inputs for machinery, pesticides, insectides, and often extensive irrigation, as well as monoculture cropping.
None of these except modest fuel (for processing) and irrigation are actually necessary in sensible farming.

gforce:
Because of this we can use machines to collect the crops easily. However if you have a mixed field with a bit of wheat, some corn, beans, potatos, carrots etc.. you can't use a machine to pick them because it's hard to differentiate between the different varieties.

Alley cropping is when farmers grow fairly narrow, long strips of different crops side by side. This is to enable mechanized harvesting, planting, etc.
It's better than normal farming, but not ideal.
In a true polyculture, you're right; mechanized harvesting is impossible, and human labour is necessary.

gforce:
So you need to go back to human labour, this is comparatively more expensive hence cost of food increases. As well as this more people have to be employed in the sector as a whole as 1 person can't collect as much as a combine harvester in a day. How many people have you spoken to who want to be a farmer?

In terms of money, in developed nations, human labour is more expensive than mechanized harvesting. But it's not really. In terms of the energy inputs required, humans perform farm work with amazing efficiency.
You're right, less mechanized farming means more humans employed in farming. Mostly it's only seasonal work that needs a lot of people.

Traditional farming societies (eg. Mexicans, Africans, Indonesians, Japanese) have families or groups of families managing and working the farms, and employ locals at harvest time (they usually get food and accomodation on site while the work is on, and often get paid in some of the farm products).
This works well for the farmers, who don't have to dish out money to get the work done, just paying in farm produce. And it works well for the workers, who get looked after, get to work with locals, don't have to travel too far to work, and get paid in local food, which they'd otherwise have to buy or barter.

gforce:
The issue of soil deteriation is one thats going (and already is) to bite us. Higher energy costs = higher fertiliser costs = higher food prices. Ok an annoyance in MEDC's but in places like Africa or Asia it could cause massive reductions in the yield of crops.

Desertification is affecting the whole world.
Much of Australia, where I live, is rapidly becoming desert from overgrazing and unsustainable cropping. Desert! It really is very serious. Much of the agricultural land is going to be useless soon.

[nicky69]

quite a lot if your the average person, especially if you move towards then growing/buying locally etc..

In ideal conditions it can take as little as 5000 sq ft of land to feed a vegan, about 1/2 to 1 acre to feed a vegetarian and 5+ acres for a diet with lots of meat in.

The wikipedia aticle sums things up quite nicely.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_vegetarianism

It is worth saying though that a meat diet can be more environmental sound than a vegetarian diet if done correctly.

that's good

[nicky69]

Ugh! My damn honda pilot sucking up all that gas, it still gets like 18-20 to the gallon but damn, i feel like i'm sucking up too much. fuck; i wish i had a honda civic hybrid, but there's so much i can do with that thing.

[TheBlackPope]

I think the biggest question here is that even if we all drastically cut out energy consumption would the earth still be able to sustainably support a population of 6-7 billion humans? My thoughts are no. We need to face the facts that there isn't enough room in this world for all of us.

Did you know that if you put the worlds population in Texas, it would still have a lesser population density that that of NYC?


TO OP: What are these so called facts? Why didn't you state them? Are you talking about global warming? or something else..?

[Dark_Magneto]

Land surface area is worthless for gauging overpopulation, as the real problems and consequences begin long before elbow room would ever become an issue.

[gforce]

Did you know that if you put the worlds population in Texas, it would still have a lesser population density that that of NYC?

Is NYC entirely self sufficient on fuel, electricity, food, water, raw materials etc...?

[TheBlackPope]

Is NYC entirely self sufficient on fuel, electricity, food, water, raw materials etc...?

Its doing pretty well w/ econ,

[ArmsMerchant]

Except there is. Most places in the world are able to support their populations comfortably. The earth, as far as space and land for agriculture we're quite peachy. We might be producing lots of pollution and straining our resources but the idea that we there "isn't enough room in this world for all of us" is unfounded.

On the contrary--that notion is "founded" on the bodies of the millions of people who are starving to death--right now.

The human species has become a sort of cancer on the earth--the huge current population will double in our lifetime.

The simple fact that there are way too many of us is at the root of all our other problems.

Do your part--don't breed!

[letsnukechina]

And seriously, people posting here need to forget about trying to find the solution to replacing fossil fuel powered private cars, as we already have one: it's called living closer to shit and getting off your ass.

Indeed... I lived out in the suburbs and needed a car to get anywhere other than the neighborhood Tim Hortons... riding a bike would involve a narrow shoulder and heavy truck traffic, not fun. Now that I'm living downtown (urban university campus FTW) I have not missed driving since; I can walk somewhere in the amount of time I used to take to drive somewhere.

[letsnukechina]

Do your part--don't breed!


Yep. Just try convincing your average person to not have kids, or adopt.

[TheBlackPope]

On the contrary--that notion is "founded" on the bodies of the millions of people who are starving to death--right now.

The human species has become a sort of cancer on the earth--the huge current population will double in our lifetime.

The simple fact that there are way too many of us is at the root of all our other problems.

Do your part--don't breed!


Actually, we have enough food. The jews just don't want to give it away.

[lifejunkie]

In the 70's we were all going to freeze, in the 80's we were all going to die from carcinogenic UV light coming through the growing Ozone holes, from the 90's onwards we're all going to burn, drown and starve from globally warming induced forest fires, ice melting and famine.

Personally I blame Jesus.

Ever since he got nailed to that plank of wood, people have been expecting him to pop up, kill Satan and then have a 1000yr long afterparty. It's obviously never happened, as I play cards with Satan every second friday of the month. What has happened, I think, is that the mentality of 'it's just around the corner' has pervasively seeped into all the dark crevices of the collective Christian psyche. So, just as the false prophets before them, the latest crop of doom mongers would have us believe that whilst all the other preceding prophecies of woe and misery have repeatedly failed to materialize, this time IT'S THE REAL DEAL!

And we lap it up, because there's nothing quite like the feeling of impending doom to spice up your otherwise mundane life. And as good Christian-heritage westerners, we're psychologically primed for just such a cataclysmic event. Sure, things will change, but then things have never stopped changing.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to sponsor some starving carbon neutral Africans in order to salve my self-loathing conscience.

We have a guy as work that says he does not need to save for retirement because the rapture will happen before he needs the money.

He's about 35 now.

[Chainhit]

i postulate that with every doomsday event there will be people with good logic and reasoning making excellent points, that will end up being completly irrelevant in like 10 years when it it does not blow up/irradicate us/etc, because THIS TIME OBVIOUSLY It will happen, and im not crying wolf this time anyway :[

then again maybe this time i should go scan the aslphalt around my yard to find clues to a million dollar treasure

[Dark_Magneto]

I'm sorry, what was the argument in all that again? "Someone made a prediction in the past, their estimate was off, therefore all estimates are off." or something to that effect?

Using a history of bad examples as a crystal ball for the future outcome of a completely unrelated scenario is a bad modus operandi that many people seem to adhere to these days.

Those who say things tantamount to "The religious apocalypse didn't happen, therefore there are no legitimate scientific concerns on any global issue" go beyond the realm ignorance.

We have a guy as work that says he does not need to save for retirement because the rapture will happen before he needs the money.

He's about 35 now.

You will be hopefully consoled to learn that the value he will receive is not in the extra income he now enjoys - for which he's obviously overpaying - but in the lesson he will learn.