• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Worlds Oceans In Dire Trouble

mdram said:
but your cup in da bucket would get the whole thing
a spill is a localized event that lessens the further you get from it
the seepage is spread out event.
i was just saying that there is already a ton of oil going into the water
and the spill has a minimal overall affect on the entire ocean
Click to expand...
BUt when you have a spill like with a tanker ground zero has the most harm. I am talking local and not over a vast area. Its like a nuclear explosion. Ground Zero is hit the hardest. THen as you travel further out the devastation is less and less.
 
Dark Jedi said:
BUt when you have a spill like with a tanker ground zero has the most harm. I am talking local and not over a vast area. Its like a nuclear explosion. Ground Zero is hit the hardest. THen as you travel further out the devastation is less and less.
Click to expand...


and this is the only saving grace
yes some sea life will be harmed
but its not catastrophic
 
shadowninty said:
I came across a pictogram [:)] that showed the contrast between the developed world and developing. We can outbuy them, and thus will be safer for a much longer period of time. Oh and I love the attitude of blame the developed world. lol
Click to expand...

Not really blaming the developed world so much as pointing out one of the problems. If we waved a magic wand today and everyone was able to live at just the poverty level of an American, much of the world would be better off, but the Earth wouldn't support it.
 
A.Nonymous said:
Not really blaming the developed world so much as pointing out one of the problems. If we waved a magic wand today and everyone was able to live at just the poverty level of an American, much of the world would be better off, but the Earth wouldn't support it.
Click to expand...
Well, its hard to assign blame. The developing countries are releasing more pollution, but the reason they are releasing so much pollution is they are making all the cheap products the developed world demands. So who is at fault?
 
Gmash said:
Well, its hard to assign blame. The developing countries are releasing more pollution, but the reason they are releasing so much pollution is they are making all the cheap products the developed world demands. So who is at fault?
Click to expand...
We just export the polluting manufacturing overseas..
 
A.Nonymous said:
That is one of the biggest problems. The people in the developed world consume at a rate that's a lot higher than than those in 3rd world countries. I think I read recently that poverty level Americans consume like 60-70% more clean water than those in developing countries.
Click to expand...
That's true and not just food. resources of all sorts. the thing is that it is not limited to highly developed countries. the newest crop of highly populous and rapidly developing countries (places like china, India and brazil), are increasing their resource consumption at tremendous rates. the combined effect of existing consumption levels from the developed countries (mainly the US, Canada, Japan, The EU, and Australia and New Zealand) and the big 3 giant developing countries is leading to tremendous pressure on existing resources of all kinds. anything from food, fresh water, energy, arable land, places to live, etc.

There has been an argument taught in universities for a long time regarding the carrying capacity of the planet. It tries to estimate how many humans can the planet maintain before there are not enough resources to go around. the typical answer is that it really depends on the manner in which people live. If the whole world lived in the way the average american person does (relatively large climate controlled homes, lots of elctricity consumption, large numbers of disposable products, non-efficient individual transportation, etc.) the the planet has most likely already surpassed its carrying capacity. On the other extreme, if most people wanted to live like the average indian person or rural chinese person (lots of manual labor, little use of electricity, local product consumption, heavy recycling, lots of public transportation, etc) then the planet can probably support quite a few more people before things start falling apart (IIRC the estimate was somewhere over 11 billion). The problem is, how do you tell people that they have to give up their cars, ACs, 3 bedroom homes,etc? no one wants to give up those things. at the same time the rest of the world is very much aware of such products and want them as well, so rather than mitigate the problem, we are making it worse.

As with anything, eventually a break in the system is going to force solutions. the more worrisome thing is how bad will that break be? As of right now, the two biggest world wide issues looming on the horizon are decreasing fresh water supplies and loss of arable land, both of which are ocurring at alraming rates, especially in the heaviest populated regions of the world. who knows what will happen when basic supplies start running short. I have a strong suspicion that major social unrest and maybe even wars are in the future of that region (especially over dwindling water supplies).
 
The other part of the problem is who those situations are going to affect. Let's be honest here, dwindling freshwater is going to affect some farmer in India long before it affects anyone in the US or any other 1st world country.
 
A.Nonymous said:
The other part of the problem is who those situations are going to affect. Let's be honest here, dwindling freshwater is going to affect some farmer in India long before it affects anyone in the US or any other 1st world country.
Click to expand...
It already has. Huge suicide rates amongst India farmers as their land is unfarmable due to lack of water
 
A.Nonymous said:
The other part of the problem is who those situations are going to affect. Let's be honest here, dwindling freshwater is going to affect some farmer in India long before it affects anyone in the US or any other 1st world country.
Click to expand...
That is very true, but tell me what happens when you get a few hundred million already poor farmers in india, bangladesh, pakistan, afghanistan, and other already arid central asian countries pushed further into poverty due to lack of water, and reduced crop yields. Is it feasible to expect increased political and social instability followed by perhaps a large drop in export yields? Maybe increases in desalinization which will yield to further increases in greenhouse gas emissions? Don't kid yourself. while these effects might not hit folks in the US directly, immediately, they most definitely affect us in meaningful ways, if not today, then down the road.
 
shadowninty said:
It already has. Huge suicide rates amongst India farmers as their land is unfarmable due to lack of water
Click to expand...

And the basic reaction from everyone in America - "What farmers?"

Their reaction after their question is answered - "Meh."

Then we wonder why so many people in the world hate us.
 
Isthmus said:
That is very true, but tell me what happens when you get a few hundred million already poor farmers in india, bangladesh, pakistan, afghanistan, and other already arid central asian countries pushed further into poverty due to lack of water, and reduced crop yields. Is it feasible to expect increased political and social instability followed by perhaps a large drop in export yields? Maybe increases in desalinization which will yield to further increases in greenhouse gas emissions? Don't kid yourself. while these effects might not hit folks in the US directly, immediately, they most definitely affect us in meaningful ways, if not today, then down the road.
Click to expand...

I don't argue with any of that really. As mentioned earlier in this thread though, we humans are not a forward looking species. We have the ability to look to the future and prepare for it yet we never do.

Just look at the space shuttle. They're retiring them next month. No arguments that they shouldn't be retired. These are 30 year old vehicles. The thing is there is no replacement for them. They started working on a replacement during Bush's second term. They won't have another space vehicle for probably 10-15 years. Did we just wake up one day and find that we had 30 year old space shuttles? No. We just failed to plan for that. Literally no one planned for it.
 
A.Nonymous said:
Not really blaming the developed world so much as pointing out one of the problems. If we waved a magic wand today and everyone was able to live at just the poverty level of an American, much of the world would be better off, but the Earth wouldn't support it.
Click to expand...

We have plenty of space on the planet.

Here is a fun fact: the entire world's population will fit in the state of Texas. When you look at how much space we have in just the United States, it is clear that space is not the issue. Resources are, but not so if we decide to solve the problems.

Vast amounts of unused space in other parts of this country as well. Just need to populate and find solutions to bringing water and energy to places considered inhabitable.

There are problems, however. More people living as "Americans" means more materials are required; more food, energy, and the like. We are clever people and when we run into trouble or need a serious problem solved, history shows we can do just about anything.

And the good thing is, when we over populate, a disease or war arrives to thin the herd. Mother nature, man . . . she knows what's what.

We have plenty of space on the globe, the ability to grow enough food to feed the planet, an almost endless amount of energy, and if we had strong leadership, we can achieve anything. We have demonstrated that simple fact countless times.

Don't Worry, Be Happy

YouTube - ‪Bobby McFerrin - Don't Worry Be Happy‬‏
 
mdram said:
1000sf per person
totally doable with high rises and stuff :)

i personally wouldn't want to live there
Click to expand...

That's the root of the problem. The happy-go-lucky crowd comes up with all these scenarios to prove that we've got no problems at all. If we all moved into the state of Texas and we all lived the way Chinese peasants live, we could easily support our current population and more without any issues. The problem is no one wants to live that way. And I can't blame them. Would anyone here want to live hand to mouth in an un-air conditioned house where you had to walk miles to and from work every day? I would not. I want to get in my car and be 20 miles away 30 minutes later and be nice and cool the whole time.
 
Come on guys. You know the rules. Keep to the issues and points. Leave each other alone, please.
 
shadowninty said:
So what do people think we should do?
Click to expand...
Ithink we can try and beat the curve early and make decisions on our own, or simply wait until the market (followed by need) make the decisions for us. Look at it this way, In most parts of the world what si considered a family, often includes extended family members covering several generations living either together or in relatively close proximity (read, the same town). IN the US already we are starting to see a move away from the Nuclear family toward something more inline with the extended family model used in most of the world. for example, rising costs of living coupled with more difficult job markets and relatively lower wages are making young people stay at home longer (often much longer), or opt to live relatively close to aging parents in order to take advantage of familial support and resource sharing. It was not so long ago that you rarely saw much of that in this country.

That's only one tiny example of some of the lifestyle changes being forced by changing economics.

I suspect that in my child's life (assuming no new sources of viable portable inexpensive fuel are found) we will see a move toward re-urbanization of our cities (read increase in apartment living and an expansion of ground level street side commercial districts), shorter commuting times, a greater reliance on synthetic materials for things like clothing (as decreasing amounts of arable land are dedicated to food production), increased public transportation, smaller living spaces, etc.

In other words, I can see that in the not too distant future an increasing number of Americans will opt to live in a manner resembling the way people in many other parts of the world live today.
 
shadowninty said:
So what do people think we should do?
Click to expand...

First, we find out just large the problem is, then we act. Otherwise, it becomes another Global Warming issue. As soon as we discover (if we do) it is not an issue, yet, we will be accused of faulty science because the environmentalists will loose power.

The ocean(s) is a big thing indeed and there might be natural forces at work that alleviate man's irresponsibility.
 
Bob Maxey said:
First, we find out just large the problem is, then we act. Otherwise, it becomes another Global Warming issue. As soon as we discover (if we do) it is not an issue, yet, we will be accused of faulty science because the environmentalists will loose power.

The ocean(s) is a big thing indeed and there might be natural forces at work that alleviate man's irresponsibility.
Click to expand...

But does it make sense? I mean for example, the principles of say, CO2 being an acid is basic stuff that everyone knows.
A lot of science is common sense. You look for relations between things, do predictions, analyze the data, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom