Tipping Point? Earth Headed for Catastrophic Collapse, Researchers Warn

[barts]

It'll control itself, in time. Indeed, a sizeable fraction of the world (China) is steadily losing population. It'll be below a billion people within the next five decades. That's an encouraging thought.

Do we have five decades? I doubt it.

[Angry Citizen]

Even if all environmentalists were on your side, power companies would still opt for coal over nuclear. In the US, "King Coal" has more control over Congress than the nuclear energy industry.

No kidding?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/0...From-Last-Year

Do we have five decades? I doubt it.

You overstate the problem of climate change. The reason why climate change is going to suck so much is that a significant fraction of the world's population is going to die, mostly in high-density, low-income regions like India, China, and parts of Africa. But the human race itself is going to be fine. "We" have all the time in the world. "They" do not. Regrettable, but liveable.

[Medensis]

We hear little more than infeasible nonsense like wind and solar from this camp. Naturally, the population that is open to the possibility of anthropogenic global warming sees an apparently intractable problem and buries their head in the sand, because the people who should know what to do, don't.

I wouldn't completely dismiss wind and solar energy. The problem with those sources are that grid electricity demands consistency and wind and solar can't offer that. The solution, however, would be to store the energy that results from the inconsistent fluctuations. There's one MIT professor who has discovered how to do just that and it's quite simple.

http://www.ted.com/talks/donald_sado...le_energy.html

--

Also, truthreality, though I'm sure you're only being darkly comical, ignoring problems that can be dealt with under our own resources and running off into space searching for "earth maid's" is irresponsible.

[Zeebadee]

It'll control itself, in time. Indeed, a sizeable fraction of the world (China) is steadily losing population. It'll be below a billion people within the next five decades. That's an encouraging thought.

Link?? When has China lost any of it's population?

Somehow, I don't believe that war and famine are good methods of population control.

[Angry Citizen]

Link?? When has China lost any of it's population?

Somehow, I don't believe that war and famine are good methods of population control.

http://www.indexmundi.com/china/tota...lity_rate.html

I didn't say it "lost" its population, I said it will lose population over a period of decades.

[Angry Citizen]

I wouldn't completely dismiss wind and solar energy. The problem with those sources are that grid electricity demands consistency and wind and solar can't offer that.

There are other problems, notably, most urban areas are located far away from the greatest sources of sunshine. Solar and wind are highly decentralized and require far in excess the normal amount of material per kilowatt, and as a result they come at a land premium. You can't just dream about sticking up a bunch of solar cells and calling it a day. At best, solar and wind will be good for reducing the load required by nuclear power; it will never be able to replace it.

[Zeebadee]

http://www.indexmundi.com/china/tota...lity_rate.html

I didn't say it "lost" its population, I said it will lose population over a period of decades.

Seems to me that that's exactly what you said: "Indeed, a sizeable fraction of the world (China) is steadily losing population. It'll be below a billion people within the next five decades. "

And a slowing rate of increase is not the same as losing population.

[Angry Citizen]

Seems to me that that's exactly what you said: "Indeed, a sizeable fraction of the world (China) is steadily losing population. It'll be below a billion people within the next five decades. "

I know what I said. Seems to me that you just don't know the difference between tenses.

And a slowing rate of increase is not the same as losing population.

Did you bother to read the link at all?

[Zeebadee]

I know what I said. Seems to me that you just don't know the difference between tenses.

LOL! Just can't admit that you're wrong, can you?? "Steadily losing population" clearly implies a current condition, in this case one that's not true.

Did you bother to read the link at all?

Yes, I did. Perhaps you ought to look at other sources of information.

"China's total fertility rate is 1.7, which means that, on average, each woman gives birth to 1.7 children throughout her life. The necessary total fertility rate for a stable population is 2.1; nonetheless, China's population is expected to grow over the next few decades. This can be attributed to immigration and a decrease in infant mortality and a decrease in death rate as national health improves.

By the late 2010s, China's population is expected to reach 1.4 billion. Around 2030, China's population is anticipated to peak and then slowly start dropping."
http://geography.about.com/od/popula...population.htm

[libcon]

It is axiomatic that every response to these types of news article/posts split into two camps. You know the camps, don't you? And that is the problem... you are a believer or a doubter and you cannot deal with the concept that both camps can join together to prepare and fix.

Look, it does not matter if you think left or right. What mattes is the temperature of our globe has been and will continue to rise. Why argue who or what is at fault? Why argue how to reverse it? The truth is it is here, it is happening, and "opinions" are getting in the way of dealing with the problem.

Hate big gov? Well guys big gov from Long Beach to The Netherlands is the only way to protect our shores. Big gov is the only way to establish new ways to keep the Midwest from blowing away... again. There has to be an agreement that it is happening first. Don't blame coal. Don't blame anyone except those who deny it is happening.

Books to read: anything by Bjorn Lomborg who explains the economics of this happening.

It does not matter if you think this is a natural re-occurring 1500 year cycle or if the industrial revolution and big bad oil is the culprit. Stop with the BLAME! Start with an economic plan to deal with it.

Sorry for the pontification

Ron

[xx_mortekai_xx]

It is axiomatic that every response to these types of news article/posts split into two camps. You know the camps, don't you? And that is the problem... you are a believer or a doubter and you cannot deal with the concept that both camps can join together to prepare and fix.

Look, it does not matter if you think left or right. What mattes is the temperature of our globe has been and will continue to rise. Why argue who or what is at fault? Why argue how to reverse it? The truth is it is here, it is happening, and "opinions" are getting in the way of dealing with the problem.

Hate big gov? Well guys big gov from Long Beach to The Netherlands is the only way to protect our shores. Big gov is the only way to establish new ways to keep the Midwest from blowing away... again. There has to be an agreement that it is happening first. Don't blame coal. Don't blame anyone except those who deny it is happening.

Books to read: anything by Bjorn Lomborg who explains the economics of this happening.

It does not matter if you think this is a natural re-occurring 1500 year cycle or if the industrial revolution and big bad oil is the culprit. Stop with the BLAME! Start with an economic plan to deal with it.

Sorry for the pontification

Ron

It would be nice if we could get cooperation. But the debate is essentially laid out with one side begging for change and the other basically pretending as if the problem doesnt even exist in some cases.

Its REALLY hard to get someone to go along with a solution to something for which the problem doesnt even exist (to them). especially when those same types are more likely to be conservative and less willing to agree to ANY kind of spending, much less spending to change something that isnt broken (again, to them).

And dont be sorry. We need more people willing to say this stuff. If there were enough pressure from voters to get this done, it might happen.