Live data from Hacker News

The world has probably passed peak pollution

sustainabilitybynumbers.com

231–240 of 383 posts

Re: The world has probably passed peak pollution

#231

It's interesting to revisit the Limits to Growth study [1] in light of these recently-declining exponential curves. Somebody did [2] and found that we're basically on track for the model's bleak predictions. But the way that the model's predictions have come true is different than what's been popularized. Instead of mass die-offs from famine and pollution, we're seeing population collapse because of birth control, de…

The distinction between the two scenarios is the original, theoretical scenario did not foresee the negative feedback loops that actually occurred. It's a pretty glaring miss when you're trying to make predictions. This is why I was always skeptical of dystopias that depend on overpopulation. If life is so miserable why would people continue to have so many children?

>If life is so miserable why would people continue to have so many children?

This right here is why I'm child free.

First, My own upbringing did nothing to equip me to properly raise a child. I simply cannot trust myself to do a good job.

Second, why would I bring a child into a world where each year will only be worst than the last, and their lot in life is to suffer the decline of the natural world and perhaps civilization as we know it until they themselves have to make the same choice? I'm sure someday the future will look brighter but it sure as heck isn't today, or any time in the next 50 years.

Re: The world has probably passed peak pollution

#232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The distinction between the two scenarios is the original, theoretical scenario did not foresee the negative feedback loops that actually occurred. It's a pretty glaring miss when you're trying to make predictions. This is why I was always skeptical of dystopias that depend on overpopulation. If life is so miserable why would people continue to have so many children?

“life is so miserable” and yet “so many children” was basically most of human history

This was well before birth control became widespread. When you can decouple the fun part from the responsibility that comes with it, you do so. Hence, why the fertility rate has been falling below replacement around the developed world.

Re: The world has probably passed peak pollution

#233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The distinction between the two scenarios is the original, theoretical scenario did not foresee the negative feedback loops that actually occurred. It's a pretty glaring miss when you're trying to make predictions. This is why I was always skeptical of dystopias that depend on overpopulation. If life is so miserable why would people continue to have so many children?

“life is so miserable” and yet “so many children” was basically most of human history

Infant and child mortality was very high. Empirically the high birth rate did not always lead to overpopulation - overpopulation waxed and waned despite the persistently high birth rate.

The sci-fi dystopias about overpopulation never really come up with a mechanism by which the birth rate remains high despite low infant and child mortality and low economic need for human labor. It always seems to boil down to "people are controlled by irrational instincts".

Re: The world has probably passed peak pollution

#234

It's interesting to revisit the Limits to Growth study [1] in light of these recently-declining exponential curves. Somebody did [2] and found that we're basically on track for the model's bleak predictions. But the way that the model's predictions have come true is different than what's been popularized. Instead of mass die-offs from famine and pollution, we're seeing population collapse because of birth control, de…

> The world is still trending toward a dystopian hellscape, but the dystopian hellscape is not a barren planet where nothing grows and we've stripped everything bare, it's a dystopian hellscape of everybody glued to their device and ignoring social interaction or family formation because Fortnite is more interesting.

Even though your statement is meant to be evocative, as opposed to factually descriptive, it sure feels to me like it captures the zeitgeist.

Which is... disappointing, upsetting, sad.

I suspect that, like me, you hope you're wrong.

Re: The world has probably passed peak pollution

#235

Tell that to the toolbags who leave their truck idling while they use multiple gas powered lawnmowers, trimmers, leaf blowers!

People leaving their cars/trucks idling with no one inside are on the same level as those still throwing their cigarette butts on the ground. I guess we can't reach everyone or some people just don't get it.

Re: The world has probably passed peak pollution

#236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sceptical about how successful secular pronatalism can be. Large families, generation after generation, can come at a substantial personal cost, and it is a difficult sell for individuals if it is just a matter of principle, as opposed to something backed by promises and threats of post mortem reward and punishment. Furthermore, many religious pronatal groups reduce defections by socially ostracising and demonisi…

Religion doesn't mean Ahura Mazda flapping about under the sun, getting all melty-winged. Everybody who gets up in the morning and behaves in the ways they honestly believe are right has religion, including the non-spiritual.

In the context of this discussion and skissane’s comment, religion is the tapestry of traditions/“beliefs” that bind a tribal group together.

I write “beliefs” in quotes because there are beliefs (i.e. assumptions) that people might have philosophically on how they model the world, and there are “beliefs” that people espouse they have as a means to bond with other members of the tribe.

Re: The world has probably passed peak pollution

#237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Posted from a huge house with air conditioning while using multiple petroleum products (iPhone/computer, chair, desk, fleece, etc). The pollution lifted every single person’s standard of living across the globe to levels unimaginable 100 years ago. It’s easy to be in Seattle or New York and say we gotta stop burning oil and coal but there are trade offs that were worth making. If you live in a developing country with…

Ah yes I forgot the standard of living is just more stuff in my house! Meanwhile we have all this cheap junk but expensive healthcare, expensive education, expensive housing, poison in our food and water, and rising temperatures. Glad some folks could binge order cheap plastic crap on Amazon for these amazing benefits. Advancement!

It's the typical "but you're typing this from an iPhone" argument. You must not criticize modern society if you participate in any part of it.

Re: The world has probably passed peak pollution

#238
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To clarify the article. This isn't peak CO2. It isn't even peak pollution. It's peak first derivative of pollution ex. greenhouse gases . We'll get to peak CO2 when emissions of CO2 are net zero, so in a few decades at best. Until then atmospheric carbon and average temperatures will keep rising.

IIRC I had to do some of that calculus stuff before cutting loose on writing upwards and downwards magnetic field continuations for geophysical exploration software suites, so, yep, cheers for that. That aside, fifty years ago was when the dangers of increasing atmospheric insulation was raised as a serious potential issue in the UN, and fifty years ago was when the think tank ecology surrounding fossil fuel producer…

Speaking of pure stupidity, I definately sometimes am.

That said, even when there's evidently plenty of malice around, I'm keeping my fingers crossed that enough cooperators can figure out how to coordinate despite all the damned defectors!

Re: The world has probably passed peak pollution

#239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, true. The evil vizier-economist's answer would be to notice that statisticians tend to estimate the value of a human life at around $10 million on average, and then notice that raising a child in the United States costs a paltry $250,000 or so over 18 years, and finally start to wonder how they can facilitate smoothing out that discrepancy across space and time to the parents' benefit. I"m not crazy enough to t…

I rarely run into a person that values their own life as high as 10 million dollars, unless they're quite wealthy.

Really? I would value my life much more than that.

I think how the question is phrased really matters.

How much do you value your life? Or how much would someone have to pay you to kill yourself?

Are these even different questions?

Re: The world has probably passed peak pollution

#240

It's interesting to revisit the Limits to Growth study [1] in light of these recently-declining exponential curves. Somebody did [2] and found that we're basically on track for the model's bleak predictions. But the way that the model's predictions have come true is different than what's been popularized. Instead of mass die-offs from famine and pollution, we're seeing population collapse because of birth control, de…

The distinction between the two scenarios is the original, theoretical scenario did not foresee the negative feedback loops that actually occurred. It's a pretty glaring miss when you're trying to make predictions. This is why I was always skeptical of dystopias that depend on overpopulation. If life is so miserable why would people continue to have so many children?

[dead]
Post reply on HN