Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Slick Vik

Limits to Growth

Recommended Posts

You're absolutely delusional. The population is seven billion and growing.

 

Hardly...

 

f2proj.gif

Whether it peaks in 2050 or some later point doesn't matter.  The growth rate for the world population has been declining since 1970.

 

worldgr.png

 

We're already nearing the peak of the curve.  The long term problem for the human race isn't overpopulation, it's depopulation.

Edited by august948

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Major companies tend to be in city centers. They aren't going to all move to suburbs. Some will but most won't.

 

Historically they have, but there's ample evidence around town that that's changing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just found this...

 

 

 

http://katytimes.com/news/article_79249148-6804-11e3-8456-0019bb2963f4.html

 

"Grocers leading the way", "employers are moving out to where the people want to live"...where they have better school districts and backyards...go figure.

 

of course grocers are going to move where the people live, they are tying to make money off them... 

employers wouldnt have to move out to the boonies if we didnt have so much damn sprawl..

schools are improving as the inner city gentrifies.. 

i have an awesome design for a residential highrise where each unit would have a "back yard"/grassy area out on whats basically a big balcony, and the tower would be a tiered/step design where each floor gets some sun/rain for their back yard, (i always wanted to be an architect or engineer) with longer skinnier units on the bottom (so that multiple "back yards" are on the same floor at the wider part of the high rise), that get wider and not as long as the floors go up, to where the top floor has just one really wide unit with sweeping views and a single back yard. i dont know if you follow..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hardly...

 

f2proj.gif

Whether it peaks in 2050 or some later point doesn't matter.  The growth rate for the world population has been declining since 1970.

 

worldgr.png

 

We're already nearing the peak of the curve.  The long term problem for the human race isn't overpopulation, it's depopulation.

thats debatable, though you were absolutely right about mature civilizations birth rates dropping below replacement rate. there are just so many people living in third world countries, and i dont think its likely every country will eventually become a first world country. there will always be rich and poor.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thats debatable, though you were absolutely right about mature civilizations birth rates dropping below replacement rate. there are just so many people living in third world countries, and i dont think its likely every country will eventually become a first world country. there will always be rich and poor.

 

You are correct in that there will always be rich and poor, nations and people.  But these terms are relative to each other.  In historical terms, third world countries are industrializing and will continue to do so.  As such, the birth rates in those countries will decline along predictable patterns.  I'm sure we could scare up some figures from various third world nations to back that up.  7 billion or 10 billion may seem a lot, but you could fit 7 billion people in the area of the state of Texas with an average density of 40 people per acre.  A crowd, no doubt, but not packed like sardines.  That would leave the rest of the Earth's surface devoid of human life.  From what I've seen the maximum carrying capacity of the Earth, from a resource viewpoint, is estimated at around 40 billion.  Long before we hit that number, if the population growth even gets close, which I don't think it will, natural selection would set in.  It's really just the peak we've got to worry about.  That may well be the biggest story of the next few hundred years when future historians look back in a thousand years time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hardly...

f2proj.gif

Whether it peaks in 2050 or some later point doesn't matter. The growth rate for the world population has been declining since 1970.

worldgr.png

We're already nearing the peak of the curve. The long term problem for the human race isn't overpopulation, it's depopulation.

Yet you choose to ignore peak oil graphs. I can pull up graphs that have the population exploding to 12 billion as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lack of food in East Africa is a transportation issue, not a food issue.. Besides, most of the famines in that part of the world are due to political upheaval, and the subsequent flight of refugees to safer locations

You are utterly clueless about fracking and its impact on water supplies. Are you still getting all of your information on the topic from the fictional Gasland movies?

How do you expect people in developing countries to get around? Walk? They do that now. That's why there's little mobility , except for a very motivated few. When I worked in Africa, the goal of every one of our employees was to save enough money to buy a car, increasing their independence, and making it possible to live a better life.

Why don't you go to communities all over the country and see what is happening to families that live nearby to fracking sites? Their water is being contaminated and their kids are getting sick and they have no choice but to move out as a result. I personally have seen it for myself in parts of Texas. Go, I dare you. Is money the only thing that matters to you?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct in that there will always be rich and poor, nations and people. But these terms are relative to each other. In historical terms, third world countries are industrializing and will continue to do so. As such, the birth rates in those countries will decline along predictable patterns. I'm sure we could scare up some figures from various third world nations to back that up. 7 billion or 10 billion may seem a lot, but you could fit 7 billion people in the area of the state of Texas with an average density of 40 people per acre. A crowd, no doubt, but not packed like sardines. That would leave the rest of the Earth's surface devoid of human life. From what I've seen the maximum carrying capacity of the Earth, from a resource viewpoint, is estimated at around 40 billion. Long before we hit that number, if the population growth even gets close, which I don't think it will, natural selection would set in. It's really just the peak we've got to worry about. That may well be the biggest story of the next few hundred years when future historians look back in a thousand years time.

40 billion? Hahahahahahaha.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I worked in the woodlands for a couple of years, don't recall ever seeing affordable housing.

Just because it's not on your work commute doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Their water is being contaminated and their kids are getting sick and they have no choice but to move out as a result.

Uh-oh, kid's got a bad cough! Something going around in school? Nah, it must be fracking. Time to move out!

Even an Associated Press study showed that fracking didn't pollute water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because it's not on your work commute doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Uh-oh, kid's got a bad cough! Something going around in school? Nah, it must be fracking. Time to move out!

Even an Associated Press study showed that fracking didn't pollute water.

 

Show me the affordable housing in the Woodlands, I really want to know.

 

Kid's got a bad cough? You are making a mockery of real, chronic illnesses. Have some shame, that remark was truly digusting. Also, have you actually read into that study?

 

 

The study released this week, done by scientists at Duke University, suggested that gas drilling causes methane gas to leak into people's water and sometimes their homes (Greenwire, May 9). But methane contamination is not caused by injecting chemicals down the well. It is caused by bad well construction during drilling.

 

But to many outsiders, particularly industry critics, fracking and drilling are the same thing. Advances in fracturing technology made possible the current shale gas drilling boom, so they have taken to lumping all shale gas production under the banner "fracking," deeming it a new form of natural gas drilling.

 

Environmentalists and other industry critics consider this distinction to be nothing more than word games concocted by oil and gas lobbyists. Whatever you call it, they say, gas production is fouling air and water.

 

"When they confine their definition to the single moment of the underground fracturing -- a part of the process that has never been investigated -- they can legally deny the obvious," wrote Josh Fox, director of the anti-drilling documentary "Gasland," in a rebuttal to industry criticism of his film.

 

"Very tricky wording," Fox wrote, "which belies the real truth. Quite deliberately."

 

http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/05/13/13greenwire-baffled-about-fracking-youre-not-alone-44383.html?pagewanted=all

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Scientists have for the first time found dangerous levels of radioactivity and salinity at a shale gas waste disposal site that could contaminate drinking water. If the UK follows in the steps of the US "shale gas revolution", it should impose regulations to stop such radioactive buildup, they said.

 

The Duke University study, published on Wednesday, examined the water discharged from Josephine Brine Treatment Facility into Blacklick Creek, which feeds into a water source for western Pennsylvania cities, including Pittsburgh. Scientists took samples upstream and downstream from the treatment facility over a two-year period, with the last sample taken in June this year.

 

Elevated levels of chloride and bromide, combined with strontium, radium, oxygen, and hydrogen isotopic compositions, are present in the Marcellus shale wastewaters, the study found.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/oct/02/dangerous-radioactivity-fracking-waste-pennsylvania

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Duke University researchers have published another study that's guaranteed to raise the ire of the energy industry by alleging that fracking increases the risk of drinking water contamination.
 

Jackson and Vengosh say the increased presence of ethane and propane can only by linked to fracking and the evidence is "hard to refute." They analyzed 141 drinking water samples from private wells in Pennsylvania's Marcellus shale basin.
 

“Distance to gas wells was, by far, the most significant factor influencing gases in the drinking water we sampled,” Jackson said in a statement. “The methane, ethane and propane data, and new evidence from hydrocarbon and helium isotopes, all suggest that drilling has affected some homeowners' water."

 

Read more here: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/business/duke-scientists-publish-third-study-linking-fracking-to-tainted-water#storylink=cpy

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Methane levels in private water wells are, on average, 17 times higher in wells that are within 1,000 feet of a natural gas drilling site.
 

“At least some homeowners who claim that their wells were contaminated by shale gas extraction appear to be right,” he said.
The peer-reviewed study was published Monday in the online Early Edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The authors said it was the first “systematic evidence “of methane contamination of private drinking wells in areas where gas extraction was occurring.
 

http://www.earthworksaction.org/media/detail/duke_study_finds_methane_gas_in_well_water_near_fracking_sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kid's got a bad cough? You are making a mockery of real, chronic illnesses. Have some shame, that remark was truly digusting. Also, have you actually read into that study?

When they started quoting the Gasland director, I quit reading.

I am not going to apologize for that comment I made. Disease happens. If they start doing fracking work, coming down with a cough doesn't necessarily mean that fracking caused it, and jumping to the conclusion that fracking did cause it is ridiculous. Besides, it's laughable you call out others for "mockery" and "shame", given your wrath about suburbanites, conservatives, anyone who watches FOX News, etc. etc.

Unless you want to start issuing some apologies to the blanket groups you despise, I suggest you stop pretending you have the moral high ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't you go to communities all over the country and see what is happening to families that live nearby to fracking sites? Their water is being contaminated and their kids are getting sick and they have no choice but to move out as a result. I personally have seen it for myself in parts of Texas. Go, I dare you. Is money the only thing that matters to you?

 

I spend most of my out of town leisure time on a ranch that has 100 fracked horizontal wells around or under it. I spend time in towns all over the Eagleford play. Not once have I seen any evidence that fracking causes an issue. Not one person has complained about their water supply, and all of them have wells. There is no substantive evidence that fracking is a threat to water supplies. What communities have you been towhere there are mass migrations out due to alleged issues from fracking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When they started quoting the Gasland director, I quit reading.

I am not going to apologize for that comment I made. Disease happens. If they start doing fracking work, coming down with a cough doesn't necessarily mean that fracking caused it, and jumping to the conclusion that fracking did cause it is ridiculous. Besides, it's laughable you call out others for "mockery" and "shame", given your wrath about suburbanites, conservatives, anyone who watches FOX News, etc. etc.

Unless you want to start issuing some apologies to the blanket groups you despise, I suggest you stop pretending you have the moral high ground.

 

Did you not see the other articles I posted from Duke researchers? He is allowed to have his quote. But I understand you hate Obama and liberals so you won't even listen to their viewpoint.

 

Again you are making a mockery of sicknesses of children which is shameful and pathetic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I spend most of my out of town leisure time on a ranch that has 100 fracked horizontal wells around or under it. I spend time in towns all over the Eagleford play. Not once have I seen any evidence that fracking causes an issue. Not one person has complained about their water supply, and all of them have wells. There is no substantive evidence that fracking is a threat to water supplies. What communities have you been towhere there are mass migrations out due to alleged issues from fracking?

 

I've been to ranches all around Texas as well and seen water being put on fire and kids getting sick after the fracking started. You can deny reality all you want but what's happening is happening and people are expendable to money for getting natural gas out of the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been to ranches all around Texas as well and seen water being put on fire and kids getting sick after the fracking started. You can deny reality all you want but what's happening is happening and people are expendable to money for getting natural gas out of the ground.

Why is it that everytime someone calls you out on something, you claim "I've been to Place X!" in an attempt to boost your credibility?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been to ranches all around Texas as well and seen water being put on fire and kids getting sick after the fracking started. You can deny reality all you want but what's happening is happening and people are expendable to money for getting natural gas out of the ground.

 

Which ranches and where?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which ranches and where?

 

 

All over, central texas, north, goliad. People get sucked in by taking the quick money but then regret it once their water supply is poisoned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh-oh, kid's got a bad cough! Something going around in school? Nah, it must be fracking. Time to move out!

Even an Associated Press study showed that fracking didn't pollute water.

I'm no expert on the subject, but I've seen reports/videos of flammable water coming out of faucets near by fracking sites, ect..

You think contaminated chemical filled water isn't able to seep into ground water supplies through the fissures they are forming every time they frack a well? Idk for sure but it seems possible, even though it may be unlikely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no expert on the subject, but I've seen reports/videos of flammable water coming out of faucets near by fracking sites, ect..

You think contaminated chemical filled water isn't able to seep into ground water supplies through the fissures they are forming every time they frack a well? Idk for sure but it seems possible, even though it may be unlikely.

 

It's more than likely, it's happening.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All over, central texas, north, goliad. People get sucked in by taking the quick money but then regret it once their water supply is poisoned.

Sorry, Google Earth doesn't count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Show me the affordable housing in the Woodlands, I really want to know.

 

Kid's got a bad cough? You are making a mockery of real, chronic illnesses. Have some shame, that remark was truly digusting. Also, have you actually read into that study?

 

Most of The Woodlands' earlier neighborhoods have at least one Section 8 complex and townhomes/condos under 150K.  Most of the houses that used to be in this price range are rapidly increasing in price.  Much less affordability in Sterling Ridge and Creekside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the Eagleford, the fracked sections of the wells tend to be 13,000 feet below ground level, with horizontal sections up to 6,000 feet long. There is no evidence that the fractures propagate out of the Eagleford, because the interfaces between formations usually stop that from happening. There are many layers of rock, each with varying properties. Water wells tend to be shallow, usually under 1,000 feet. The fractures do not propagate through 12,000 feet of rock.

Any methane in water is coming from shallower formations, and is not fracking related.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...