Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lindy
I think we're already too far behind the curve. There's a couple/three billion people in the world that want what we (USA and Canada) have, and are willing to go to any length to get it. They won't want to tolerate any regulations that impede their development.
How many automobiles will it take to make China, India, Indonesia happy? Not to mention the exploding populations of Africa and Brazil who would like air conditioning.
|
This is a big reason why its such a pressing issue. Not enough people have the foresight to see what's happening.
Quote:
|
And now, after the tsunami, there's a hue and cry to take nuclear energy completely off the table. Which will greatly increase the demand for and price of oil. Duh! So now, for the sake of the environment we should stop environmentally marginal production? And replace it with what?
|
There have been vocal opponents of nuclear energy for years (David Suzuki comes to mind). The amount of money plowed into nuclear (much of it wasted and irrecoverable) could have been put into safer, renewable sources of energy.
Quote:
So, the elephant in the room is:
The world cannot sustain a high standard of living (or development, if you will) and a population of nearly seven billion people. For a truly sustainable high standard of living, like we enjoy in USA, Canada, Western Europe, and a few other places, about five billion people need to die. Any volunteers?
|
I disagree with your premise. I think it's because you base it on current factors. We need to change the factors. I think a high standard of living is possible, but it depends on your standards. You can have a high quality life without being wasteful. Sustainable living is possible, the problem is that we lack the will. Unfortunately, I think it will take dire situations before people will get it.
Quote:
|
edit: Interesting that the poll would us the term "oil exploitation" rather than the more neutral "oil production."
|
The problem isn't with oil "production," it's with "exploitation." There is little neutral about oil. This is the problem
Production is a rather antiseptic term. Who doesn't like production? Production is good.
Exploitation has a double meaning; it is either generally "use"; or, as is the case here, it refers to the use of something unjustly---meaning, there are negative consequences to the action.
I refer to the oil production that has widespread negative consequences. There is little clean about these operations, and it's not simple "production." Obtaining oil in and of itself isn't inherently bad. It's a fuel source and many products can be made from it. The problem is that the way we currently obtain it in certain locales. It exploits the environment and communities within them.
The poll option doesn't refer to reducing the simple production of oil; it refers to reducing the exploitation of it. Oil is a part of the environment within which it is acquired. We don't necessarily need less oil; we need less of the damages extracting it causes. That's what that poll option refers to. It acknowledges the virtual unavoidable connection between oil production and environmental degradation.
---------- Post added at 06:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:34 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by aberkok
Energy cost and supply. Just the other day I was ranting that we need a politician with the balls to tell us we are going to ration power (like a hose ban... even numbered addresses have power one day, odd numbered addresses the next).
|
Ouch. What about energy quotas?
Quote:
|
That way, wind, solar and other clean forms will begin to suffice en lieu of deadlier forms like oil and nuclear.
|
I think what will (and should) happen is that oil will become outrageously expensive (I believe peak oil is real and that the global recession has been hiding it well) and demand for alternatives will spike. You're going to see green energy increasing on the individual family level: solar power and high-tech/new energy efficiencies built/reno'd into homes. You are going to see it on the corporate/government level: green roofs becoming the norm, etc., urban farming, etc. I think that 20 or 30 years from now, you're going to look back at the 2010s as the turning point decade of shifting away from the oil paradigm. Just wait until the global economy recovers by the end of the decade. Watch the price of oil.
Quote:
|
The alternative, as I see it... is that we can all die a slow painful death.
|
Anything slow enough can be avoided in the end. Let's hope the problem is a slow one.