It's still a taboo. But it is being talked about more in closed groups. But you can't comment on someone's baby pics 'another nail in coffin for climate change'
Think our population is projected to fall without immigration soon.
The impending environmental disaster
- Thread starter 413x
- Start date
It's still a taboo. But it is being talked about more in closed groups. But you can't comment on someone's baby pics 'another nail in coffin for climate change'
Think our population is projected to fall without immigration soon.
Start to get the beginning of it I think. Gonna start by moving to a more elevated position soon as a start!
co2 fell by 6.4% or 2.3billion tonnes (twice as much as Japan produces each year) during covid whereas normally it increases year on year by about 10% so it was really a 16% drop from what it would have been. US had the biggest drop, 13% which accounted for a 25% of the world wide drop in emissions.
The fact is we need to be dropping by 7.6% every year to hit the targets so we are a long lone way from getting anywhere near that.
The main culprits are Fossil CO2 emissions – coal, oil, gas and cement – which peaked at 36.64 GtCO2 in 2019. Until we replace most of those 36.64 Gt CO2 with alternatives then the rest is just a drop in the ocean.
Nope. Our world and the societies in it are fundamentally stupid.
Some people are in poverty and can barely eat, whilst others spend thousands buying dogecoin off each other.
If you really take a big step back and look at how our society and economy work, its completely broken and im pretty certain it will all come crashing down at some point.
Caporegime
Very profound. It's like saying I'm sure the sun will burn out at some point.
The elephant in the room....
It is staggering how many more people exist in my lifetime and that the population will have doubled before I die. If every one of the people in 2090 wants something approaching a western lifestyle, we have serious issues.
It is staggering how many more people exist in my lifetime and that the population will have doubled before I die. If every one of the people in 2090 wants something approaching a western lifestyle, we have serious issues.
It’s really not the elephant in the room. The irony is that if you lift people out of absolute poverty and give them a western lifestyle, they have a lot less babies and population growth falls off a cliff.
‘Western’ societies are not growing that quickly and some of them are shrinking.
When you give someone a western lifestyle their consumption is an order of magnitude higher than those who have a developing country lifestyle and it’s the consumption that is the issue.
‘Western’ societies are not growing that quickly and some of them are shrinking.
When you give someone a western lifestyle their consumption is an order of magnitude higher than those who have a developing country lifestyle and it’s the consumption that is the issue.
...which is what I was saying. Just because population will flattern out things won't be ok. If we stay at 10 billion even for 2 or 3 more generations imagine the impact of that consumption.
Commissario
Also at the same time you tend to help them move away from some of the worst polluting methods of things like heating and cooking which offsets some of the increases in energy that follows.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 7,740
I'd be more concerned about the death of the sun in 5 billion years! Or the death of the oceans and multicellular life in about 1 billion years...
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,333
and thus lies the core of the depopulation argument.
the more people there are, the lower the quality of life that can be achieved if everyone's living at the same general standard.
question boils down to which world humanity would rather live in, evidently overcrowded and resource limited seems to be the preference.
Soldato
Too many people worldwide.
Too many multi car households being used for short journeys.
Too many short haul plane journeys.
Too many long haul plane journeys.
Too much "tat" being ordered from countries such as China and India, then receiving countries claiming they've reduced their emissions.
Thowaway society.
Etc.
Just like Covid, too little will be done too late by most countries' governments and individuals. Planet earth, the animals and plants and us will be doomed within another few generations.
Too many multi car households being used for short journeys.
Too many short haul plane journeys.
Too many long haul plane journeys.
Too much "tat" being ordered from countries such as China and India, then receiving countries claiming they've reduced their emissions.
Thowaway society.
Etc.
Just like Covid, too little will be done too late by most countries' governments and individuals. Planet earth, the animals and plants and us will be doomed within another few generations.
Yes, there is a limit to how many humans can probably sustainably occupy the planet, however I don't think we're near that if we actually tackle the problem of how to live in a sustainable way with nature.
It's not a black and white issue between government, big companies or the individual, it's actually all of those. Consumers can shape demand, but governments must help incentivise change, and big companies must invest wisely and potentially even re-invent themselves. If we can do all those, we have a chance to avoid some of the worst impacts. We're already too far gone to prevent any impact, some bad **** is going to happen this century whatever we do.
I think that when I'm now making decisions about what to buy, how to live etc. I'm thinking more and more about the environmental impact of what I do. I encourage you to as well. I have children and I would love to leave them in a world that was better than the one I arrived into and previous generations have given us. That's motivation enough. Can I afford solar panels, a new electric car, a heat pump system etc. - No, I can't. So this is where government needs to step up and companies need to make wise decisions as well. Then we have to make good personal choices. If a sustainable option was a comparable price, or even a bit more, maybe with some inconvenience, I would still jump on as I know it's the right thing to do, which could help accelerate change. I could probably do more, but I find myself making little changes all the time that hopefully will add up.
To those who think this is some left-wing propaganda or political issue, overall it really isn't. I would think the vast majority should now accept this as an anthropogenic issue and if you can't, probably best to step aside for a bit. This is a matter of survival for our (and many other) species. Sure, let's debate about how best to solve the problems, but obstructing constructive dialogue is like letting the clock run out when you're losing instead of trying to win the game.
It's not a black and white issue between government, big companies or the individual, it's actually all of those. Consumers can shape demand, but governments must help incentivise change, and big companies must invest wisely and potentially even re-invent themselves. If we can do all those, we have a chance to avoid some of the worst impacts. We're already too far gone to prevent any impact, some bad **** is going to happen this century whatever we do.
I think that when I'm now making decisions about what to buy, how to live etc. I'm thinking more and more about the environmental impact of what I do. I encourage you to as well. I have children and I would love to leave them in a world that was better than the one I arrived into and previous generations have given us. That's motivation enough. Can I afford solar panels, a new electric car, a heat pump system etc. - No, I can't. So this is where government needs to step up and companies need to make wise decisions as well. Then we have to make good personal choices. If a sustainable option was a comparable price, or even a bit more, maybe with some inconvenience, I would still jump on as I know it's the right thing to do, which could help accelerate change. I could probably do more, but I find myself making little changes all the time that hopefully will add up.
To those who think this is some left-wing propaganda or political issue, overall it really isn't. I would think the vast majority should now accept this as an anthropogenic issue and if you can't, probably best to step aside for a bit. This is a matter of survival for our (and many other) species. Sure, let's debate about how best to solve the problems, but obstructing constructive dialogue is like letting the clock run out when you're losing instead of trying to win the game.
And yet again a thread of folk just throwing in their tuppence and walking away.
Watch. the. cartoon.
Watch. the. cartoon.
Soldato
It's all just tinkering around the edges. I still eat meat, but have cut down drastically, and intend to do even more so.
But officially, cut down on meat? Cut down on flights? Oh noes, we can't do that! The planet is ****** regardless.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58981505
But officially, cut down on meat? Cut down on flights? Oh noes, we can't do that! The planet is ****** regardless.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58981505
You've just answered it yourself. The reason for people not having kids is not "eco anxiety", birth rate has been dropping for a while and its generally because people are selfish and want their "me time" and don't want the responsibility of dependents. The latter is broadly a much better understood trend.
Next up, others have mentioned it already but historically there has always been significant climate change to some degree. It's not to say we don't contribute to it but we've been through various regional and global variations without armageddon.
Funny how we will all rush to switch to electric cars and other new mass produced eco produce - just perpetuating exactly the same phenomenon of mass consumerism which you also mention
"I'd like to share a revelation I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species. I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with their surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to another area, and you multiply, and you multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague, and we are the cure."
So 10 billion at Western levels will be equivilent of 100 billion at the current 3rd world levels
But that's absolute bs no mammal does that, they all happily bread and consume to the point of starvation
Movies are not reality
The equilibrium isn't a conscious decision it's one achieved through food supply/scarcity causing populations to increase and dwindle. It swings back and forth but generally there is an equilibrium.
Generally this falls apart in situations such as invasive species being introduced or the environment is suddenly and radically altered by an upright evolved monkey apex predator.
We did used to find a balance but then we got smart and overpowered and too numerous.