Saturday the 21st of August we went into Ecological Debt

Panda with issues...

Well-Known Member
Not really sure about the mechanism they are using to calculate their budget.

I can tell you for sure that somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 of the world's protein comes from fishing:

Large scale commercial fishing is one of the most wasteful activities on the planet, and there is abundant evidence that the majority of fish stocks have collapsed or are in the process of collapsing. - Case study: The collapse of the Newfoundland cod stocks.

Most experts believe that world oil production peaked somewhere between 2000 and 2005, and that Texas peaked in the 70's, North Sea peaked in the 90's and though data are not released, the Middle East and Siberian Basin have probably peaked too.

I have it on decent (an academic who works as a consultant for the oil industry) authority that in the 70's, the Saudi's tried turning their flow rate up to maximum, just to see what rate they could theoretically extract at: They got a trickle.

Peaking means that in well explored regions we have the most difficult, economically marginal, often inferior quality (heavy) hydrocarbons left to extract.

In regions without mature exploration history (eg. west coast of africa/barents sea/south china sea/east coast of south america, there are different problems in addition.

The oil is easy and good in Angola and Nigeria, but the countries are dangerous politically. The conditions in the Barents Sea are harsh, and the hydrocarbons there are mostly the less useful gas. South China sea contains vast amounts of CO2, and off South America the plays are very deep and difficult to drill.

We probably have around 300 years of coal left, but coal is dirty. Nuclear power is the future, but that too is a finite resource (until Fusion is perfected, still a pipe dream currently). GM Biofuels are very promising, and help with CO2 drawdown, but have to compete with food crops to feed a population that is expanding unsustainably fast.

Loss of hydrocarbons also affects our ability to produce plastics.

Other resources are not necessarily under such threat, I.E metals and minerals. (This is my specific area).

These depend strongly upon supply and demand. If demand is strong enough, the concrete outside your doors could be mined for the parts per trillion levels of gold it contains, but it is energetically very unfavourable to extract, and would take a vast amount of energy resources to produce.

More crucially, Rare Earth Elements and Space Age High Tech metals are rare, and very difficult to find. Case Study - Tantalum: Tantalum is used in tiny efficient capacitors for the electronics industry. The mobile phone boom wastes this every year, and there are only about 3 places in the world it can currently be mined.

Case study: Indium. This is a key component used in flat screens and touch screens. It is also crucial for the production of solar panels. China controls the only supply of it in the world, and are reducing export quotas dramatically in order to prepare for their own future.

Things you take for granted like water will be under threat over the next 100 years as we suffer from higher temperatures due to climate change and ridiculous levels of overpopulation. Water is effectively 'mined'. It is not an infinite resource, parts of california have subsided over 30 feet over 30 years from the amounts of water they have 'mined'. Fertilisers require phosphate. Phosphate is not a common mineral. Industrial scale agriculture (whether for food or biofuels) requires fertilisers and water. This is NOT A PRETTY PICTURE PEOPLE.

Climate change is happening people. Don't believe the bullshit columnists feed you trying to knock the argument apart. Its hard to come to terms with, but I've seen the data. Send me a pm if you want it. I am a Ph.D student at the National Oceanography Centre, Southampton. I get exposed to this stuff because of the research that is done there. I am a geologist who specialises in Natural Resources, and works principally with the mining industry.

What can you do?

Here's some simple things to be aware of:

Stop wasting water. Take showers, not baths, don't leave the taps running etc.
Try and buy British produce. Specifically vegetables and fruit which are often imported at great fuel cost from around the globe. If you can, buy organic, as they may not have had as much wasted fertiliser used on them. Don't buy products with excessive packaging, particularly in the supermarket.

Drive as little as possible. - I have only filled up my car 4 times since last October. It'll probably only be 5 times all year.

Stop wasting electronic components - You do not need that new goddamn iphone. I'll bet THN is TERRIBLE for this. I have had the same phone since 2002.

Recycle as much as you can, sadly the UK is not particularly helpful about this.

Stop wasting electricity. Turn off your appliances at night.

Just don't buy into the wasteful western lifestyle that is pushed on us. I'm not saying we need to turn into afghanistan or anything, just don't get new stuff just because you can. You'll be surprised how much you save too.
 

Angelic

Active Member
Like Haven, I feel really strongly about this. It often earns me a raised eyebrow from my more sceptical friends and yes, I'm not a professional with scientific studies to back up my belief, but I honestly think THIS is the greatest threat we are facing, not pandemies, AIDS or terrorists.

I didn't know that the ecological debt is this high (over 1/3!) but I'm not surprised :(

Thing is, beliefs are all nice and well, but it comes down to the lifestyle we lead. Like Panda said, there are many things everyone can do without cutting back on his/her comfort too much - public transport over cars, sorting the waste (glass, plastic, paper etc), turning off appliances etc. Where it gets hard is buying the bio/local foodstuffs (because they are so darn expensive - at least in Czech Republic) or not getting fancy digital toys we all love (or, well, I do :)). As a matter of fact, eat less meat too - the resources required to produce energetic equivalent in meat to the same amount in lentils/wheat/vegetables etc are way, way higher. Plus it's not healthy ;) Those things are, I think, a task worthy of a mature person :)

Also, in regard to the biofuels - I tried being a fan of those, but according to some studies it would seem that by occupying so much fertile land they are actually less ecological than oil. So yeah, that doesn't seem too good.
 
G

Gombol

Guest
Best way to save resources is to stop building stupid things that are not really needed.

Would save Food for workers.
Fuel for the diggers 'n stuff.
Stone / wood / whatever for the actual building.

And more.
 

Panda with issues...

Well-Known Member
Thing is, beliefs are all nice and well, but it comes down to the lifestyle we lead. Like Panda said, there are many things everyone can do without cutting back on his/her comfort too much - public transport over cars, sorting the waste (glass, plastic, paper etc), turning off appliances etc. Where it gets hard is buying the bio/local foodstuffs (because they are so darn expensive - at least in Czech Republic) or not getting fancy digital toys we all love (or, well, I do ). As a matter of fact, eat less meat too - the resources required to produce energetic equivalent in meat to the same amount in lentils/wheat/vegetables etc are way, way higher. Plus it's not healthy Those things are, I think, a task worthy of a mature person

This is a really good point. Just eating LESS of everything can really help, especially meat. It makes you healthier, you waste less in multiple ways: Less packaging, as you are buying less, less money, as you buy less, less energy from creating the packaging and transporting the food, as well as less energy from growing it and fertilising the ground. Do you really need those biscuits or crisps? No.

The energetic equivalent is a really important point too. IOt is why fish farming will never work.

Fish in fish farms are fed using bodies of other fish. For example, your farmed salmon is fed using pureed anchovies from off the shore of Peru (typically). These anchovies are caught using industrial fishing methods (incredibly wasteful) then processed, which requires energy, then are transported andthen fed to other fish, but not all the energy and biomass in the anchovies gets transferred to the salmon. It is not conserved over the trophic level in the ecosystem, just like when we eat the salmon, we don't gain every bit of energy that wen't into growing it. - The salmon has to breath, and move and replace dead cells, and we would gain more energy just from eating the equivalent amount of anchovies it took to culture the salmon ourselves.
 

Ronin Storm

Administrator
Staff member
Just eating LESS of everything can really help, especially meat.

An aside to this one:

Nutritionally speaking, some people's diets benefit from meat more than others and can't so easily transition to a more agrarian diet. Conversely, many who eat meat aren't actually so well suited to it and would actually do better on a mixed or primarily agrarian diet. Having experimented with this over the course of the past five or more years, I've discovered that I'm more in the former category (a "hunter", so to speak) than in the latter (a "gatherer" or "hunter-gatherer"). That said, the vast majority of the meat I buy is both local and organic, or at least one of the two.

This is one area where population pressure on food supplies puts us keenly at risk.
 

Xylak

New Member
If there weren't so many people, there wouldn't be such a problem.
World population doubled in just 40 years (3 billion in 1960 to 6 billion in 2000).

While it is predicted that world population will start to decline by the end of this century, that doesn't help much now.

Was about to sprint into a lecture on peak population but it would go on for a while...
Basically, we need to stop people making babies!
 

Chuchurocket

In Cryo Sleep
Yeah, sure. "Hey, everyone! Stop doing one of the most enjoyable things in the world!" That'll work ;)

Sex with the aim to procreate is one of everyones favourite things in the world? i must be the exception that proves the rule :P Though living in Essex you see your far share of friends ending up with babies VERY young.
 

Xylak

New Member
If only there was some way to allow you to have sex without having babies as a result.
 
E

elDiablo

Guest
If only there was some way to allow you to have sex without having babies as a result.

Shall I go into comparing countries that have large population growth and those that have easy access to birth control? I could do a nice Venn Diagram!
 

Chuchurocket

In Cryo Sleep
Shall I go into comparing countries that have large population growth and those that have easy access to birth control? I could do a nice Venn Diagram!


Id bet you'd enjoy doing the diagram almost as much as the topic its on :P Anyway we all know that the truth birth control is a Crisp Packet with an elastic band :P
 

Ghostwolf67

Well-Known Member
Tackling global climate change will be incredibly and insanely difficult, mainly because what you are essentially fighting is human greed and excess.

Urgh that sounded a little bit like a bible passage didnt it? But i think thats the core of the problem here. We've been given all these wonderful gadgets, food, entertainment and no real restrictions on any of it save for whether you can afford it or not. The no real restrictions is the problem part in my mind. When you are simply using morals and ethics to try and fight a problem this huge its going to get uppercut by the twin fists of stupidity and ignorance.

At this rate its not going to be a great future what with having half the worlds capitals needing to be changed seen as the old ones are underwater. And we're mining rubbish tips and landfills for precious metals and plastics.
 

Ki!ler-Mk1

Active Member
Recycle as much as you can, sadly the UK is not particularly helpful about this.

Yes, i am always getting in trouble because i put all non biodegradable waste in the recylcing bin, and the garbage bin only gets stuff like old batteries and cooked food (we have a compost bin too), i just think it should be the governments responsibility to take waste which is non-recyclable and non-biodegradable and store it until the technology to recycle it exists.

And, as of the 1st of july i hibernate my pc regularly instead of leaving it on all day because turningoff and on takes soo long and causes so many programs to close/loose data.
 

Haven

Administrator
Staff member
You have the solution in front of you:
and no real restrictions on any of it save for whether you can afford it or not.

Make children more expensive. A tax on children after the first one, criminal charges and social stigma over <some arbitrary number>. Tax incentives for those with no children or who take permanent birth control measures.

All of these options (bar the possible criminal idea which is a silly one but I'll leave it in for discussion) should be voluntary and hence will be enforced by economics.

This does not address the issues of those outside of the tax system but bringing them into society would need to be dealt with also.
 

Haven

Administrator
Staff member
i just think it should be the governments responsibility to take waste which is non-recyclable and non-biodegradable and store it until the technology to recycle it exists.

Replace government with "my". I strongly believe we need to change our habits as consumers in what goods we purchase and the overall costs of their destruction once we've finished with them. There really needs to be an energy tax on-top of VAT that takes into account the costs of build, use and destruction of items. If this was implemented then economics of efficiency will play a bigger part in our consumer choices.
 

BiG D

Administrator
Staff member
You have the solution in front of you:

Make children more expensive. A tax on children after the first one, criminal charges and social stigma over <some arbitrary number>. Tax incentives for those with no children or who take permanent birth control measures.

Honestly not sure that will work. Children are ALREADY expensive, and the trend is already working the other way around -- People with less money (and education) have more children on average than folks who are richer. By limiting children like that, we're just making the poor poorer. All that will do is make their children poor as well, and as a result more likely to make the exact same mistakes.

We need to focus on education and good jobs for those under the poverty line. As their quality of life improves, so will that of their children, and (eventually) the average children per family will drop.
 

Haven

Administrator
Staff member
Yeah I guess my thoughts may work for those who are middle class and are more tax motivated (a very UK concept but hopefully it makes sense). I guess we'd need to know why the poorest have more children - the old concept was so that the parents had children to look after them in their old age when they couldn't afford a pension.

Other reasons could be - simple boredom, lack of education on contraceptives or knowingly manipulating the benefits system in which sometimes being unemployed and having lots of children brings in more money than you would earn if you employed full time.

Some thoughts but I've honestly no idea which is correct, the truth is probably a combination of all of them plus a few others.
 
Top