Socrates Posted December 7, 2004 Share Posted December 7, 2004 It's a little ridiculous how this "everybody living in Texas" illustration seems to have become the main focus of this debate. The world is not going to get that crowded, so that is a little beside the point. And besides, if everbody lived in the state of Texas, they could get recources, food, water, etc., from outside the state. The world, using its current cropland, could feed twice the world's current population (and all indications are that the world's population will not reach that number.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aloha918 Posted December 7, 2004 Author Share Posted December 7, 2004 we are exspected to run out of oil in the next 50 years..........is that a lot of resources? maybe be for a short time, but not for years to come If i said that we would run out of food i must have wrote it wrong.....there is no way that we will run out of food Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomProddy Posted December 7, 2004 Share Posted December 7, 2004 [quote name='Paladin D' date='Dec 4 2004, 11:58 PM'] One way to really piss abortionists off: Have 20 kids per family, and watch as we slowly take over by our numbers. *Evil laugh* [/quote] Otherwise known as the "Roe Effect". And funnily ehough, it works Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted December 7, 2004 Share Posted December 7, 2004 [quote name='aloha918' date='Dec 7 2004, 02:50 PM'] we are exspected to run out of oil in the next 50 years..........is that a lot of resources? maybe be for a short time, but not for years to come If i said that we would run out of food i must have wrote it wrong.....there is no way that we will run out of food [/quote] 50 years? Says who? And even if it is true (and I don't think it is), that is not a problem of overpopulation, its a problem of lifestyle and it has nothing to do with population. The US is not the most populous nation. It does, however, consume the most resources (several times over the next highest). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don John of Austria Posted December 7, 2004 Share Posted December 7, 2004 The US has nough Coal to use Coal for ALL of it's energy, ALL of it to make synthetic gas for all it's cars, to replace hydroelectic dams with nuclear reactors, etc and have enough for 300 years, 300 years that is a LOT of coal, that doesn't include the Coal in other parts of the world just the coal in the US herself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aloha918 Posted December 8, 2004 Author Share Posted December 8, 2004 [quote name='popestpiusx' date='Dec 7 2004, 03:21 PM'] 50 years? Says who? And even if it is true (and I don't think it is), that is not a problem of overpopulation, its a problem of lifestyle and it has nothing to do with population. The US is not the most populous nation. It does, however, consume the most resources (several times over the next highest). [/quote] i completely agree that it is our lifestyle.......but there are other factors.....education and resources Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aloha918 Posted December 8, 2004 Author Share Posted December 8, 2004 [quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Dec 7 2004, 04:46 PM'] The US has nough Coal to use Coal for ALL of it's energy, ALL of it to make synthetic gas for all it's cars, to replace hydroelectic dams with nuclear reactors, etc and have enough for 300 years, 300 years that is a LOT of coal, that doesn't include the Coal in other parts of the world just the coal in the US herself. [/quote] this is very true....but if we did that i KNOW that it would be a bad decision....coal increases our CO2 level and is not very enviormentaly friendly.....in fact it is the worst.......not to mention when they get coal they ruin very large amounts of land......coal is a short term solution with a lot of long term effects Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Aluigi Posted December 8, 2004 Share Posted December 8, 2004 drill in alaska how bout that commercial with the deep sea explorers gettin more oil and besides, they're workin on hydrogen technology, and all sorts of alternative fuels that look very promising. unless your the scientist preparing to get rich off of the imminent new power source that will eventually emerge, it really does no good to worry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don John of Austria Posted December 9, 2004 Share Posted December 9, 2004 [quote]increases our CO2 level and is not very enviormentaly friendly.[/quote] Burning anything increases your CO2 level, some types of coal have a lot of Sulfur but many do not, furthermore thare are many anti polution technologies which help preventthese problems avialable they just must be used. [quote]not to mention when they get coal they ruin very large amounts of land..[/quote] nowdays they are required to return the land to its original state if they strip mine, but a great deal of coal is still mines with shafts the old fashion way, which doesn't harm the land at all, anymore than a salt mine. I am not saying we shoould just start useing coal for everything but we have it, we can use it, we are NOT running out of fuel resources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aloha918 Posted December 9, 2004 Author Share Posted December 9, 2004 [quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Dec 8 2004, 09:26 PM'] Burning anything increases your CO2 level, some types of coal have a lot of Sulfur but many do not, furthermore thare are many anti polution technologies which help preventthese problems avialable they just must be used. nowdays they are required to return the land to its original state if they strip mine, but a great deal of coal is still mines with shafts the old fashion way, which doesn't harm the land at all, anymore than a salt mine. I am not saying we shoould just start useing coal for everything but we have it, we can use it, we are NOT running out of fuel resources. [/quote] This is true............... although coal produces the MOST CO2, has high environmental impact, air and water pollution, high land use, health effects...........coal is not the answer also the anti pollution technologies are called scrubbers....they do get SOME of the pollution out...but not anywhere near the amount they need to The thing you said about still mines im not to sure about......i am not really familiar with that....but i amm pretty sure that once the land is stripped mined, the land will be useless....and i believe that it is still very much so being done today...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aloha918 Posted December 9, 2004 Author Share Posted December 9, 2004 [quote name='Aluigi' date='Dec 8 2004, 03:23 PM'] drill in alaska how bout that commercial with the deep sea explorers gettin more oil and besides, they're workin on hydrogen technology, and all sorts of alternative fuels that look very promising. unless your the scientist preparing to get rich off of the imminent new power source that will eventually emerge, it really does no good to worry [/quote] drilling in alaska is the worst idea ever......the amount of oil that we would get from there would last the U.S. about 6 months.....it would also disturb the Alaskan Wildlife Refuge, which is one of the prettiest things on this earth They are working on other fuels sources, but oil right now is so important to our way of life.....its not just gas....oil makes everything......it makes plastic....and Americans use a lot of plastic I wouldn't really say that i am worried....i just think that we need to do something about all of this....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullnaChinaShop Posted December 9, 2004 Share Posted December 9, 2004 [quote name='aloha918' date='Dec 9 2004, 10:04 AM'] i amm pretty sure that once the land is stripped mined, the land will be useless....and i believe that it is still very much so being done today...... [/quote] I grew up in an area where stip mining for coal was done. At least around there it was required that the land be what they called reclaimed. Reclamation involved saving the material stripped away and replacing it after the coal was removed. They at least attempt to put things back as close as they can to how they found them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aloha918 Posted December 9, 2004 Author Share Posted December 9, 2004 [quote name='BullnaChinaShop' date='Dec 9 2004, 11:28 AM'] I grew up in an area where stip mining for coal was done. At least around there it was required that the land be what they called reclaimed. Reclamation involved saving the material stripped away and replacing it after the coal was removed. They at least attempt to put things back as close as they can to how they found them. [/quote] well thats ok......but i would still think that they couldn't put it back exactly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted December 9, 2004 Share Posted December 9, 2004 [quote name='aloha918' date='Dec 9 2004, 11:10 AM'] I wouldn't really say that i am worried....i just think that we need to do something about all of this....... [/quote] Addressing the resourse issue is quite a bit different than population control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the protector Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 (edited) [quote]50 years? Says who? And even if it is true (and I don't think it is), that is not a problem of overpopulation, its a problem of lifestyle and it has nothing to do with population. The US is not the most populous nation. It does, however, consume the most resources (several times over the next highest). [/quote] I've got news for you. Our economy is almost entirely dependent on oil. Our economy also relies on perpetual growth. Now, what happens when we reach that halfway point when oil production decreases each year while demand increases? The real issue is not when we run out of oil, as it is when oil production will peak. Problems arise when demand outsrips production that will only decrease throughout the years. There are many respected geologists who believe we will reach that point within the next three years. Why have we been able to sustain a population of 6 billion? Oil. [url="http://peakoil.com/fortopic1687.html"]Leibig's Law[/url], look into it. Edited December 10, 2004 by the protector Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now