The Biomass of mammals on Earth is sobering. Livestock, mostly cattle and pigs (60%) Humans (36%) Wild animals (4%)
Oh, just wait until you include avians. There are so many chickens. Soooo many.
Holocene Extinction
31–40 of 136 posts
Re: Holocene Extinction
#32This way of living, with that many people on the planet is not sustainable. We are on a runaway train to extinction and we want it to go faster. The economy!
This is a frequent topic of discussion at https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/
What happens to the economy when a significant portion of society wakes up to the reality of the biosphere collapsing? Will it happen soon or when the oceans are dead or the pollinating insects extinct?
Re: Holocene Extinction
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are there any resources for determining which US politicians support environmentalism (specifically meaningful, evidence-based policies as opposed to vapid virtue signalling) and/or where the "battleground" states are? I guess in general I'm looking to get involved more in climate politics, but I don't know where to start.
> meaningful, evidence-based policies as opposed to vapid virtue signalling You would need to define what set of policies you consider which first.
I'm not really sure how to break down "evidence-based" any more for you. It's pretty self-explanatory. Virtue signalling refers to actions that indicate you care about a topic (the environment in this case) but without any real commitment to the cause. For example, politicians who want to appear to care for the environment might promote a ban on plastic straws because it generates lots of good publicity, is only most mildly inconvenient, and is transparently negligible with respect to saving the planet ("better than nothing" unless one accounts for the squandered political will).
Re: Holocene Extinction
#34This way of living, with that many people on the planet is not sustainable. We are on a runaway train to extinction and we want it to go faster. The economy!
Are there any resources for determining which US politicians support environmentalism (specifically meaningful, evidence-based policies as opposed to vapid virtue signalling) and/or where the "battleground" states are? I guess in general I'm looking to get involved more in climate politics, but I don't know where to start.
As a first step, vote blue in November.
Re: Holocene Extinction
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
With very few exceptions, any affordances technology brings are consumed by humanity's insatiable appetite before they can benefit the environment. If technology figures out how to make $X more energy efficient, we just run more $Xs such that the (trajectory of) energy consumption is constant.
A big exception is energy. Net electricity usage per capita has leveled out or declined in the developed world since around the year 2000. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.USE.ELEC.KH.PC?locat...
Isn’t just counting the developed world missing the problem though? We also moved all of our manufacturing to the developing world at the same time and they saw a much greater increase.
Shipping stuff around the world and moving your pollution to Asia doesn’t do much good when we all share the same atmosphere.
Re: Holocene Extinction
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes but who’s willing to get off at the next station, not the passengers who’ve been on it from the start and not the passengers who just got on and are getting a taste.
Technology really is the only way out.
No. Political will is the only way out. Technology alone is not going to help when politics is geared to subsidize dirty fuel, permit polluting industry and avoid economic interventions that would help, like carbon taxes.
Re: Holocene Extinction
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
With very few exceptions, any affordances technology brings are consumed by humanity's insatiable appetite before they can benefit the environment. If technology figures out how to make $X more energy efficient, we just run more $Xs such that the (trajectory of) energy consumption is constant.
A big exception is energy. Net electricity usage per capita has leveled out or declined in the developed world since around the year 2000. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.USE.ELEC.KH.PC?locat...
This is really interesting; I wasn't aware. That said, "per capita" is the wrong metric since we're discussing humanity in aggregate. I might still be wrong about energy in general, however. In any case, I think the broader principle holds.
Re: Holocene Extinction
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Technology really is the only way out.
No. Political will is the only way out. Technology alone is not going to help when politics is geared to subsidize dirty fuel, permit polluting industry and avoid economic interventions that would help, like carbon taxes.
Technology makes cleaner solutions cheaper, rendering all that irrelevant.
Re: Holocene Extinction
#39Humans can have a beneficial impact on the environment too, by terraforming and making the land more productive.
There's some evidence that the Amazon mix of fruiting tree and nut species were selected for by humans.
"The Supposedly Pristine, Untouched Amazon Rainforest Was Actually Shaped By Humans"
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/pristine-untou...
Since some people us this as political grounds for eugenics and population control. Such as one child policies, like China used to have. I think the proper way need to view ourselves, is as "gardeners" and caretakers. What we destroy in one area, we should rebuild in another, or make better.
For example, we could make connected "green corridors" that span the entire country, through which animals can migrate and live in. We have disrupted the migration paths of some species with out cities. But nothing says that we can't make it better by providing routes for these animals around our cities and farms.
Re: Holocene Extinction
#40This way of living, with that many people on the planet is not sustainable. We are on a runaway train to extinction and we want it to go faster. The economy!
This is a frequent topic of discussion at https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/ What happens to the economy when a significant portion of society wakes up to the reality of the biosphere collapsing? Will it happen soon or when the oceans are dead or the pollinating insects extinct?
There's a risk that not much will happen (from this realization alone). Most people don't have much power to do anything about it other than joining political movements. And for the individual life goes on. Once it starts to affect society itself we will act but only to do something about the immediate concern.
The economy/society works like this, it can only be forced into action because there is yet no efficient way to coordinate action over the scale required.