perpetual growth...

Or you come to realize we have already grown far beyond sustainable numbers.

Yes. By two and a half.
Time is ticking.

Click, clock, click, clock, click, clock....

In Message 1656710
Martin wrote:

A Revolution needed to come clean?

Yes, without a doubt. People are NOT going to want to do what is necessary to 'Clean things up'.
---------------------------------------------
In Message 1656712

Martin wrote:

UK fracking industry calls for new regulator

... "Britain has one of the most robust set of regulations in the world for shale gas," a government spokesperson said. "Both the Health and Safety Executive and the Environment Agency have full authority and responsibility to monitor all shale sites - independent of the industry," the spokesperson, from the Department of Energy and Climate Change, added.

But the taskforce, which is funded by shale companies...

... "If the industry develops and the number of applications rises, there will be a need for a single, simplified system," Lord Smith added.

He said the new regulator would also involve the local community in the monitoring process and assess the integrity of wells to make sure any problems that could lead to leaks are discovered and remedied....


And that is all before even considering the CO2 pollution

and all the additional pollution from leaking methane... (With ongoing practices in the USA a very big bad example...)

To me, that all sounds like the present regulator is doing a good job to limit the excesses of new pollution!

There is, of course, another explanation. A simpler, more streamlined, single-agency regulatory framework will be easier for the fracking companies to bribe and otherwise influence. Politics + Money = Corruption.

As to your comment

and all the additional pollution from leaking methane... (With ongoing practices in the USA a very big bad example...)

Yes, a LOT of methane is released in the USA, from a variety of sources. Sources such as rice farming, raising ruminant livestock (like cows), garbage landfills, and release from industrial processes. Trust me, to the oil companies, accidental leakage of natural gas equals lost profit. They do all they can to avoid leakage.

In a good chunk of California, the MAJORITY of released methane is from the dairy cow herds.
--------------------------------------
In Message 1656753

janneseti wrote:

perpetual growth...

Or you come to realize we have already grown far beyond sustainable numbers.

Yes. By two and a half.
Time is ticking.

Click, clock, click, clock, click, clock....

Hmm... your figure of 2.5x is a bit overly optimistic.

There are a number of problems we are facing today. Including but not limited to: GHG-ACC (greenhouse gas induced anthropogenic climate change), total ACC, environmental pollution by toxic chemicals, destruction of the natural habitat, and yes... sustainability (consumption of resources at a rate less than their replacement rate is sustainability).

ALL of these issues have, as their root cause, the extremely large human population.

A good approximation of the impact we have on the planet would be:

Impact = Population * Affluence * Technology.

A certain level of resource use per capita is necessary.

The relative level of affluence increases the resource use per capita and introduces waste.

The level of technology also increases the resource use per capita and even more waste. Don't look to technology to solve this problem. It cannot. Technology only makes the problem worse.

Yes, the USA is the king of non-sustainability. Our per-capita ecological footprint is about 5 times greater than the world average. But don't the rest of you all get cocky.

Europe is about 2.5 times greater than the world average.

The world average is about 2.5 times greater than the poorest 2.3 Billion of us.

And, at current population levels, the POOREST 2.3 Billion of us average about 12% more resource use than what is sustainable.

At the extremely poor levels of affluence and technology present in the poorest areas of the world, the maximum sustainable world population would be about 6.2 Billion

At the 'world average' levels, the maximum sustainable world population would be about 4 Billion.

At the somewhat more comfortable, but still kinda crazy high European average levels, the maximum sustainable world population would be about 2 Billion.

At the piggy levels of the USA, the maximum sustainable world population would be a tad less than 1 Billion.

And these figures only include the Problem of Sustainability... NOT any of the other issues.

Considering the other related issues (especially the 800 pound gorilla in the corner: GHG-ACC -- all of it, not just GHG from Fossil Fuel use, Martin) and the maximum world populations drops CONSIDERABLY more, down to perhaps 3 million (at near zero affluence and technology) or much less (a world maximum population of 500,000 people at American levels of affluence and technology) if we want any affluence or technology to speak of.

So, your figure of 2.5x too many people is more than a little bit too optimistic, janneseti. But at least you understand that current population levels are not in any way sustainable.

Yes, a LOT of methane is released in the USA, from a variety of sources.

And Capstone Turbine of Chatsworth, California, is Working Hard to turn Methane into Electricity, VERY CLEANLY.

Super Clean Fossil Fuel Burning Micro Turbines.

Lovin' Fossil Fuels, Always and Forever.

Got Green Fossil Fuels?

Green Once, becomes Green Again.

Yep

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

janneseti wrote:

perpetual growth...

Or you come to realize we have already grown far beyond sustainable numbers.

Yes. By two and a half.
Time is ticking.
Click, clock, click, clock, click, clock....

Hmm... your figure of 2.5x is a bit overly optimistic.

There are a number of problems we are facing today. Including but not limited to: GHG-ACC (greenhouse gas induced anthropogenic climate change), total ACC, environmental pollution by toxic chemicals, destruction of the natural habitat, and yes... sustainability (consumption of resources at a rate less than their replacement rate is sustainability).
ALL of these issues have, as their root cause, the extremely large human population.
A good approximation of the impact we have on the planet would be:
Impact = Population * Affluence * Technology.
A certain level of resource use per capita is necessary.
The relative level of affluence increases the resource use per capita and introduces waste.
The level of technology also increases the resource use per capita and even more waste. Don't look to technology to solve this problem. It cannot. Technology only makes the problem worse.
Yes, the USA is the king of non-sustainability. Our per-capita ecological footprint is about 5 times greater than the world average. But don't the rest of you all get cocky.
Europe is about 2.5 times greater than the world average.
The world average is about 2.5 times greater than the poorest 2.3 Billion of us.
And, at current population levels, the POOREST 2.3 Billion of us average about 12% more resource use than what is sustainable.
At the extremely poor levels of affluence and technology present in the poorest areas of the world, the maximum sustainable world population would be about 6.2 Billion
At the 'world average' levels, the maximum sustainable world population would be about 4 Billion.
At the somewhat more comfortable, but still kinda crazy high European average levels, the maximum sustainable world population would be about 2 Billion.
At the piggy levels of the USA, the maximum sustainable world population would be a tad less than 1 Billion.
And these figures only include the Problem of Sustainability... NOT any of the other issues.
Considering the other related issues (especially the 800 pound gorilla in the corner: GHG-ACC -- all of it, not just GHG from Fossil Fuel use, Martin) and the maximum world populations drops CONSIDERABLY more, down to perhaps 3 million (at near zero affluence and technology) or much less (a world maximum population of 500,000 people at American levels of affluence and technology) if we want any affluence or technology to speak of.
So, your figure of 2.5x too many people is more than a little bit too optimistic, janneseti. But at least you understand that current population levels are not in any way sustainable.

MajorKong.
That was a very long to say that that our Earth situation is not sustainable:)
You have so much good information in this post that I have to read more tomorrow.
It's rather late here.

Majoritarian democracy is a BAD thing. It rapidly becomes tyranny.

That it does. It squelches different viewpoints. You can't express them, because everyone knows what is right, never mind the Earth isn't flat or at the center of the universe, or that global warming is .....

---

Majoritarian democracy is a BAD thing. It rapidly becomes tyranny.

That it does. It squelches different viewpoints. You can't express them, because everyone knows what is right, never mind the Earth isn't flat or at the center of the universe, or that global warming is .....
____________

MMMM Thank's Bro , so Australians are a bunch of what was it Kong said , Yahoooo's

And i live in a Tyrinicle state run by a bunch of iddiots .


Well i have to agree at the moment , the people gave the Rabbit a chance and he has stepped over the line and put his foot in his mouth 1 too many times

It's Why i call Tony Abbott , 1 term Tony . mmm He's not a Liberal a Climate Denier , the one whom got rid off the scientists advising the gov would it .
A Republican = Liberal National Party here

---

Only a Representative Democracy (aka a Republic) operating under STRICT Constitutional LIMITS has a chance of doing a reasonable job of properly governing a nation.

Major what an elitist devil you are.
_______

Be carefull what you wish for , the Rabbit was a very crafty man and a reel snake , Lies and Deception all ways blows up in there faces ..

And the Republicans tend to do it more often

I wonder if i do 1 or 2 things on a state level For Climate Change it will bowd well if i run for the Number 1 job , President

I can always override them when i'm numro Uno . Besides the next guy will change them back on the state level by time i'm President

---

Gentlemen, this government talk is getting far off the topic of climate change, I suggest we move it over here http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=77015 so Martin doesn't have to complain to the mods.

---

Roger Roger sorry

---

“Temperatures have been flat for 15 years—nobody can properly explain it,” the Wall Street Journal says. “Global warming ‘pause’ may last for 20 more years, and Arctic sea ice has already started to recover,” the Daily Mail says. Such reassuring claims about climate abound in the popular media, but they are misleading at best. Global warming continues unabated, and it remains an urgent problem.
Earth Will Cross the Climate Danger Threshold by 2036!
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earth-will-cross-the-climate-danger-threshold-by-2036/

After reaching its seasonal maximum on February 25, the beginning of the melt season was interrupted by late-season periods of ice growth, largely in the Bering Sea, Davis Strait and around Labrador. Near the end of March, extent rose to within about 83,000 square kilometers (32,000 square miles) of the February 25 value. The monthly average Arctic sea ice extent for March was the lowest in the satellite record.

Advancing knowledge of Earth's frozen regions
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

latest Co2 level and there is still 6 more weeks till we get to the max for this year

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/

404.65ppm

---

Resident CO2 Monitor said:

404.65ppm

Dr. HOHUM, 'Thought' dat CO2 'is' a Lot Tastier. Mmmmm Mmmmm Mmmmmm. Da mO da Betta.

fO shO and da 'Added' CO2 makes My DRum DRum beat Beat beat Beat so Much Hotter!

I Needs All da CO2 Izzz cans Gets. BRING 'IT' ON. CO2 Me. C O 2 Me. Oh Yeah.

My Roots are-a-Pumpin' dat CO2. Chug-a-Lug. GULP!

CO2, what da Shat 'is' dat? Oh, some kind of Human Waste? YUMMY YUM YUM! GOoD Shat! Feed Me!

Swimmin' or Slimin' Along on Moonlight Bay. Hey, Gots ta Think Posi Oh Baby.

Yep

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

Gooba last year at this time the Co2 was 400.5 that's a increase of 4 ppm in 1 year at that rate we only got 50 yrs not 72 so don't you worry mister tree you'll get heaps of Co2 for your roots , But mister worm i'm sorry it's the wrong human waste for you you'll die and mister Ho Hum well you don't need air of any type .

---

Two recent stark sets of examples:


Over population, over consumption - in pictures

... One group thought that the simplest way would be to show people

Overdevelopment, Overpopulation, Overshoot...


Air pollution may cause more UK deaths than previously thought...

... lethal nitrogen dioxide from diesel engines and wood, oil and coal burning...


The recent smog over parts of Europe and the UK are a good and visible reminder that in with all that pollution is the unseen pollution of CO2 that is industrially belched out with that smog. Only on this brief occasion, we are directly reminded of the pollution due to the local weather pattern not sweeping our rubbish elsewhere for a few days...


There has just got to be a more civilized less corrupt way that is sustainable!


All on our only one planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Thanks ML1.
Two quotes from your link that stroke me:

‘Water and air, the two essential fluids on which all life depends, have become global garbage cans.’ Jacques-Yves Cousteau
‘Throughout history human exploitation of the earth has produced this progression: colonise-destroy-move on.’ Garrett Hardin

About overpopulation.
Isn't human and rats the by far largest mammal population spieces in the World?

Thanks ML1.
Two quotes from your link stroke me:

‘Water and air, the two essential fluids on which all life depends, have become global garbage cans.’ Jacques-Yves Cousteau

That one is from a long time ago! And yet still we garbage our planet.

‘Throughout history human exploitation of the earth has produced this progression: colonise-destroy-move on.’ Garrett Hardin

Sounds just like boom-and-bust plagues of locusts... Except we have the power of our industrialization...


Can positive politics, cooperation (rather than selfish confrontation), and the power of science save our day?...

Or will Marketing and corruption bring us all and most of our planet to an untimely unnatural end?...

Or... Revolution?


All on our only one planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

‘Water and air, the two essential fluids on which all life depends, have become global garbage cans.’ Jacques-Yves Cousteau
That one is from a long time ago! And yet still we garbage our planet.

Yes. It's from a movie I saw in the mid 60's.
Almost 50 years ago!

Mother nature taking it's revenge?

Asian Carp one source of climate change

They're kidding, right?

I see business potentials here.
Export karps to Poland. No Christmas without karps there.
Perhaps sell karps to fish farmers.