http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/companies.aspx?ID=BD4A269857
I think I'll go buy two used Excursions in need of tune ups.
I think I'll go buy two used Excursions in need of tune ups.
Take that, Peak Oilers!
- Thread starter BrianWC
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,793
Well, JMH, we gotta think about this. What's the number 1 population reducer? It spans cultures and ethnicities. Industrialization. The western cultures, in just two or three generations, abandoned the 5-7 kid household. Indonesians are trekking to the city for higher pay and no longer want to spend their life bent over in the terraced rice paddies for a lifetime just to survive.
The question is, can industrialization reduce enough of the population in time to cause a reduction in environmental impact ...or is it too late and we'll have to let starvation and other natural inhibitors stunt the population growth (we, by the way, tend to interfer with natural inhibitors in population managment)?
The question is, can industrialization reduce enough of the population in time to cause a reduction in environmental impact ...or is it too late and we'll have to let starvation and other natural inhibitors stunt the population growth (we, by the way, tend to interfer with natural inhibitors in population managment)?
Gary Allen, I've got to disagree with you, sort of. Industrialization may reduce the rate of reproduction, but it also reduces the death rate. We just don't have plagues and famine in the industrialized world like we use to.
The "be fruitful" strategy was just barely keeping up with the pathogens and draught for thousands of years. A couple of antibiotics, some handwashing, and an irrigation ditch later and we've got people everywhere. The impact of toilet paper alone on disease transmission was huge.
Now that was clearly off topic!
The "be fruitful" strategy was just barely keeping up with the pathogens and draught for thousands of years. A couple of antibiotics, some handwashing, and an irrigation ditch later and we've got people everywhere. The impact of toilet paper alone on disease transmission was huge.
Now that was clearly off topic!
You can't look at one thing. If you look at population explosion without looking at who is using resources, then you get a distorted picture.
Right or wrong (and I'm making no judgments here) the citizens of North America use more resources per-capita than most other areas of the world.
There are exceptions of course, but we have one of the lowest birthrates and one of the highest rates of consumption / capita.
I imagine that we are doing pretty well at maintainting consumption for the 5-6 extra kids the average family here doesn't have.
I live alone (most of the time) in a 3 bedroom home, own two cars, drive 35K+ miles/year, eat out when I like, etc.
I'm sure my footprint on this globe is heavier than the typical 41 year old man in China.
Right or wrong (and I'm making no judgments here) the citizens of North America use more resources per-capita than most other areas of the world.
There are exceptions of course, but we have one of the lowest birthrates and one of the highest rates of consumption / capita.
I imagine that we are doing pretty well at maintainting consumption for the 5-6 extra kids the average family here doesn't have.
I live alone (most of the time) in a 3 bedroom home, own two cars, drive 35K+ miles/year, eat out when I like, etc.
I'm sure my footprint on this globe is heavier than the typical 41 year old man in China.
Read a well-written concise logical article a long time ago.
Sure made sense to me.
The writer basically proclaimed that it is America's county health departments that keep us from being akin to a 2nd- or 3rd-world country.
Clean water free of pathogens.
Mostly proper sewage disposal.
Testing of food production facilities to minimize pathogen transmission.
A whole host of stuff that minimizes the spread of disease and bad little bugs that want to eat us from the inside.
Yeah, the guy was writing in generalities. Efforts at the federal level help extend our lives and minimize death rates for the young.
Private enterprise assists by creating and disseminating the products that help protect us from pathogens.
Our education system and culture generally encourages the behaviors that keep the death rate down.
Of the many areas, the USA's pathogen-free water supply is critical. Oh yeah, there are instances where a town's or individual's water supply will become contaminated but constant testing typically finds the problem and it is fixed. It isn't often you hear of an American dying from bad water.
Education, cultural values, individual and group effort, all these lead to longevity.
Now, wash yer' dern hands after going number two, you savages.
Sure made sense to me.
The writer basically proclaimed that it is America's county health departments that keep us from being akin to a 2nd- or 3rd-world country.
Clean water free of pathogens.
Mostly proper sewage disposal.
Testing of food production facilities to minimize pathogen transmission.
A whole host of stuff that minimizes the spread of disease and bad little bugs that want to eat us from the inside.
Yeah, the guy was writing in generalities. Efforts at the federal level help extend our lives and minimize death rates for the young.
Private enterprise assists by creating and disseminating the products that help protect us from pathogens.
Our education system and culture generally encourages the behaviors that keep the death rate down.
Of the many areas, the USA's pathogen-free water supply is critical. Oh yeah, there are instances where a town's or individual's water supply will become contaminated but constant testing typically finds the problem and it is fixed. It isn't often you hear of an American dying from bad water.
Education, cultural values, individual and group effort, all these lead to longevity.
Now, wash yer' dern hands after going number two, you savages.
Yes, JHZR2 sums it up.
"The next object is...a lie. A lie."
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,793
I totally disagree. Look at our western culture (any western or para-western culture) compared to India or China ..both agrarian cultures. If India could export filth ..it would flood the rest of the world and still have a surplus. Now the elimination of leathal infectious diseases has been the primary reason for an expanded life expectancy ..but nothing has lengthened the human life span.quote:
Originally posted by GMorg:
Gary Allen, I've got to disagree with you, sort of. Industrialization may reduce the rate of reproduction, but it also reduces the death rate. We just don't have plagues and famine in the industrialized world like we use to.
The "be fruitful" strategy was just barely keeping up with the pathogens and draught for thousands of years. A couple of antibiotics, some handwashing, and an irrigation ditch later and we've got people everywhere. The impact of toilet paper alone on disease transmission was huge.
Now that was clearly off topic!
All the western (and para-western nations) nations are very old. All of them. Most of our population growth is from immigration ..and it may be mandatory (as much as we don't like it) because we didn't have enough children to fill our vacating positions in the society. There was no geometric progression to our population growth. My parents, both born to lower income households ..had 5 and 6 siblings. Their children didn't ..but all the agrarian cultures just kept up the pace.
Your example may work in some parts of Africa where either drought, or famine, or AIDS, or civil war act as natural population inhibitors.
Which would be which parts?
JHZR2
Staff member
OK, here is what I think:
forget the spin-meisters that post on this site. Forget the ideas that things have to be one way or another, and it is all cut and dry.
-Is there a carbon cycle? yes
-Does this mean that oil may be produced even as we speak? probably
-Are the kinetics of such potential reactions on any time scale that society is working on? almost surely not
Now, as a good aside, I am at the 232nd American Chemical Society meeting this week. Think about the great stuff that has been brought about since just the 200th ACS meeting. Extend the same to a Chemical or petroleum engineering conference, and think about the wonderful technologies that have been brought about...
It sure seems to me that it is very plausible for the technology advancement to outpace most anything else, and allow us new technology to find more oil reserve under the earth, better and more efficiently extract what there is, and make better use of the crudes that we pull out to create product. All of those things equal more oil available to the world.
However, as I said above, even if oil is reproduced via a carbon cycle, the rates of the production are most surely so low compared to our use that it does not alone equal sustainable operations. This is why, in the big scheme, things like 5w-20 oils are important...
If sufficient testing indictes that for some large subset of conditions, 5w-20 protects equivalently to a heavier oil, yet produces 0.1% greater fuel economy, is it a bad thing to do? Your pocketbook will never feel 0.1% improvement... but integrate that 0.1% improvement oer all the cars, driven all the miles, over a large portion of the world... and the savings start to add up. As I said earlier, just because we have the ability to find more resources, and because we've been blessed with continuing abundance and new technologies to let us harness it, does not mean in and of itself that we can continue to do so in a sustainable fashion, without major changes.
Until someone proves that the synthesis reactions tethered to the earth's carbon cycle have kinetic rates high enough to equal world usage rates for 2050... I still demand that we, and 'we' includes China, India, and all those spinmeisters who think there is no need to think aboutthe environment, the air we breathe, etc., all be good stewards of wat *** has blessed us with and use it properly. Sure, it may not make someone the likes of GWB AS rich, but it will be in the best interest of us all.
JMH
Anybody read Malthus and his predictions of population growth without the bugger factor of technology? Technology keeps increasing food supply in step with or just beyond demand, allowing more people to be sustained on less resources.
The single innovation that has allowed population growth is the underground sewer. Without that one single innovation, there would be no way population densities would be possible such as there are in london and other cities similar in density.
Dan
The single innovation that has allowed population growth is the underground sewer. Without that one single innovation, there would be no way population densities would be possible such as there are in london and other cities similar in density.
Dan
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,793
(visions of disgrunted city employee in RoboCop)
Disgrunted city employee:"I want a car that goes really fast and gets ***** gas mileage! ..and I want the city to pay for it all!"
Swat team commander (Jerry Orbach): "Sure, pal. How about a 2000 SUX? We'll even throw in a Blaupunkt."
Disgrunted city employee:"I want a car that goes really fast and gets ***** gas mileage! ..and I want the city to pay for it all!"
Swat team commander (Jerry Orbach): "Sure, pal. How about a 2000 SUX? We'll even throw in a Blaupunkt."
JMH,
You make one untenable assumptions in your analysis of the carbon cycle. Will any set of countries band together and reduce their energy usage voluntarily. As it happened when the whale oil ran out in the late 1800's, the lack of oil will force us to find the next big thing to power our world, what it will be at this time is any one's guess. Only scarcity of the resource and the market forces it sets off will ultimately force change. Legislation will not, it will only create black markets that are harder to manage than the change will be.
The drug war could be a model to predict behavior on the subject of oil use. And since oil is something everyone uses, it will create even more corruption, market chaos, and attempted government control of individuals than the drug war, all useless in the end since the market will dictate prices, demand, and supply.
Have you ever read about the tragedy of the commons? It applies very well to this problem.
Dan
You make one untenable assumptions in your analysis of the carbon cycle. Will any set of countries band together and reduce their energy usage voluntarily. As it happened when the whale oil ran out in the late 1800's, the lack of oil will force us to find the next big thing to power our world, what it will be at this time is any one's guess. Only scarcity of the resource and the market forces it sets off will ultimately force change. Legislation will not, it will only create black markets that are harder to manage than the change will be.
The drug war could be a model to predict behavior on the subject of oil use. And since oil is something everyone uses, it will create even more corruption, market chaos, and attempted government control of individuals than the drug war, all useless in the end since the market will dictate prices, demand, and supply.
Have you ever read about the tragedy of the commons? It applies very well to this problem.
Dan
JHZR2
Staff member
The problem is that just because there are potentially available resources does not mean that it is a green light to overuse and guzzle away. Many think it is. I disagree.
It is great if lots more oil is found, and it drops prices. However, we know that the world is growing fast, and the demand is growing, maybe not that fast, but ertainly is growing and will suck more and more down, faster and faster.
Whether we run out in my lifetime or run out ever, people should be good stewards of what we are given, and so one way or another, we should strive to do this.
JMH
It is great if lots more oil is found, and it drops prices. However, we know that the world is growing fast, and the demand is growing, maybe not that fast, but ertainly is growing and will suck more and more down, faster and faster.
Whether we run out in my lifetime or run out ever, people should be good stewards of what we are given, and so one way or another, we should strive to do this.
JMH
- Status
Similar threads
