The Environment

[Admiral Huddy]

Did any one see this yesterday evening?

http://www.mymultiplesclerosis.co.uk/big-ideas/environmentalism.html

It was quite an interesting article on one the hottest topics at the moment (no pun intended. I have to admit, it was quite thought provoking.

It was an insight into the real state of the world by controversial author and Greenpeace activist, Bjorn Lomberg. Although he recognises that there are problems with the environment which everyone needs to address, he paints a more optimistic picture of our planets resources, the environment and in particular Global Warming. He states that the “Doom and Gloom” factor that everyone is made to believe isn’t as bad as what everyone thinks.

He stated that the world is a better position than is has been over the past 100 years and slams the media scare mongers, in particular the media and politicians. He explained that we now have a greater knowledge of the environment and the consequences of our actions than ever before. However, the population of our planet is growing alarmingly. Is our planet really capable of hosting such a large population without exhausting it’s natural resources? I think not. Humans are living longer and are multiplying at an excessive rate. This has a massive impact on the world economy and the environment.

He believes that investing in third world poverty would greatly improve basic living in developing countries which would have a far greater impact on the environment. I’m not so sure about this. He failed to raise the point that China is the largest growing economy but also one that produces the most carbon dioxide on our planet, yet we all enjoy the cheap exports because they suit our pockets.

He raised some very interesting point, but my feeling is that developed countries must set the standard for the rest of the world. This includes China. I think the governments of the world can do more and set this example.

I’m particularly annoyed that politicians and commercial industries (like the supermarkets) use environmental issues to gain votes or sell their products respectively. Have you ever seen what the supermarket throw away at the back.. You’ll be shocked yet they go on about a few carrier bags. Complete hypocrites.

Bjorn claims that it isn’t too late. Isn’t it? The felled rainforest are gone forever, the retreating ice has melted, extinction for some specifies of life is irreversible. I’m not sure how he can say that. Looking out the window today, have you ever known a spring as hot as it has been over the last few weeks? My flowers in the garden started to bloom in December. Visible evidence. It is frightening but it’s refreshing to see someone coming forward and challenging with more optimism than pessimism, albeit I’m not convinced.

What are your views?

[Daz]

Dodging the topic slightly (as I dont really have enough knowledge to make an informed contribution), the 'it's getting hotter outside' argument doesn't really sit great with me.

Every year we hear how "temperatures haven't been this high since [date]/[older date]/[even older date]". If things were hot then and it cooled off, why couldn't it do the same again?

[Admiral Huddy]

This is true.. The media did say last week that it was the hottest April for 60+ years.. which means 60 years ago it was hotter, yet there wasn't the environmental issue then that there are now.. was there?. So this is an example of media scare mongery?

[Daz]

Originally Posted by Admiral Huddy

yet there wasn't the environmental issue then that there are now.. was there?.

I doubt the technology existed for them to tell one way or the other.

I'm all for people being more efficient with resources, keeping to renewable ones wherever possible and making sure that they are renewed (ie, recycling) - nobody should use disbelief in climate change as an excuse to waste. But I do wonder if we really are going to flood the planet (going to an extreme)

[Treefrog]

Originally Posted by Daz

I'm all for people being more efficient with resources, keeping to renewable ones wherever possible and making sure that they are renewed (ie, recycling) - nobody should use disbelief in climate change as an excuse to waste. But I do wonder if we really are going to flood the planet (going to an extreme)

Likewise. My main concern is a combination of yours and Huddy's points. With the population growing at it's present rate thus depleting finite resources at an increasing rate, we need to make effective voluntary changes now to avoid catastrophic change being forced upon us in the not-too-distant future.

Another point I made over on the other side which I've seen in the news in the past week: biomass, biodiesel, etc are all very well as alternatives to fossil fuels, but with an expanding population will we have the land available to grow food and biofuels?

And by the time these questions have been debated to death, committees set up, the doubters and the unwilling convinced - will there be enough time left to act?