Earth 2100

[Flames in 07]

Anyone else watching this? This is the most impactful show I think I've ever seen.

[MelBridgeman]

bah fear mongering

[Regulator75]

I PVR'd it earlier tonight, will check it out tomorrow.

[Devils'Advocate]

I watched the first half-hour. The rest I'm recording.

There are some things I agree with. Some I don't.

The primary thing that I agree with is that humans will do absolutely nothing beyond token measures like recycling (and they kick and scream about having to do even that) until there is an absolute crisis. But their example of an absolute crisis wouldn't be big enough. A category 5 hurricane wouldn't do it.... we already had Katrina. While 'Nature' magazine has had articles linking global warming to number and strength of hurricanes, there are plenty of others that dismiss their findings.

But I'm putting all my money into desalination plants. Looks like a great stock to get into.

[HOOT]

Got it PVR'd might watch it now.

[HOOT]

Thought the show was neat. Way too many commercials lucky I PVR'd it.

Pretty scary to think this could happen in my life time, but who knows.

[jolinar of malkshor]

I watched it. Meh. It is one of 1,000,000 different out comes that may happen by 2100.

[Thunderball]

It was an interesting program to be sure and really brought up a lot of questions, but it really left the one big one unanswered in the "good" scenario...

If the Earth can't sustain much more than 2-4 Billion people, how do you really deal with the elephant in the room... namely, runaway population growth in the third world? They simply said "make it better there", but that really doesn't mean much. Unless you force contraception, one-child policies, and introduce a very foreign and authoritarian stance, I don't see that changing in time. Save of course for a massively destructive war or virus in those areas.

Their nightmare simulation was really dependant on the continuing appearance of the worst case scenario. It also was very America-centric, and didn't take into account Siberia, Alaska, and Northern Canada, and how much more arable and habitable that would become.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

It was an interesting program to be sure and really brought up a lot of questions, but it really left the one big one unanswered in the "good" scenario...

If the Earth can't sustain much more than 2-4 Billion people, how do you really deal with the elephant in the room... namely, runaway population growth in the third world? . . . . .

Not just population growth but the fact those third world nations, through globalization, are moving to second world and eventually first world economic status.

Some have speculated that globalization in the last decade created 600 million new Americans, complete with their consumptive habits.

It's fine to blame existing first world nations for climate issues but you're beating a dead horse to build a cleaner world if China, India, et al are ignoring the issue to the extent they are.

I was going to throw in the line "well, everyone WANTS a cleaner world" but, you know what, that's not necessarily the case.

Cowperson

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

Not just population growth but the fact those third world nations, through globalization, are moving to second world and eventually first world economic status.

Some have speculated that globalization in the last decade created 600 million new Americans, complete with their consumptive habits.

It's fine to blame existing first world nations for climate issues but you're beating a dead horse to build a cleaner world if China, India, et al are ignoring the issue to the extent they are.

I was going to throw in the line "well, everyone WANTS a cleaner world" but, you know what, that's not necessarily the case.

Cowperson

Exactly. The growing pains in South Asia are massive, and there's really not much anyone can do. That leading by example crap is a nice sentiment, but really, those countries don't care what America or Europe does. They'll probably see it as decadence, something they can't afford to follow suit with.

That doesn't mean we should do nothing though. But it means we should plan for massive water pipelines, and desalinization plants now, while we can. I thought it was kind of interesting when they said a 400 mile pipeline wasn't feasible, seeing as that's not an unreasonable stretch of pipeline for the oilpatch. In fact, I could see a combination new water pipeline construction, or conversion of oil and gas pipelines to water pipelines being a new industry in the next century.

[jolinar of malkshor]

I am tired of all this scare about running out of water. We have all the water we need in the world. We have the technology to turn sea water into pure water.

Humans can do anything they want they just have to be motivated to do it. We could make all the fresh water we ever wanted if we just really wanted to do it. It would cost a lot of money for the infrastructure and energy, but we could do it.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

I am tired of all this scare about running out of water. We have all the water we need in the world. We have the technology to turn sea water into pure water.

Humans can do anything they want they just have to be motivated to do it. We could make all the fresh water we ever wanted if we just really wanted to do it. It would cost a lot of money for the infrastructure and energy, but we could do it.

Yeah, that was another issue with the whole Doomsday Scenario. It wouldn't be just the City of San Diego building one Desalination Plant, it would be the US Government building dozens to water the entire SW. I mean, the Hoover Dam was a massive undertaking, so its far from unprecedented. 400 miles of pipeline is not a serious undertaking if the need is there.

However, now is a good time to start with building sustainable water, so when we really, really need it, we're not behind the 8-ball. Of course, I doubt it would ever be as bad as that scenario. For example, Las Vegas is a multi-billion dollar industry, if anyone thinks they wouldn't find a way to keep it watered at any price, they're crazy.

[HotHotHeat]

Time and channel?

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

Time and channel?

It was a 2hr special on ABC.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

I am tired of all this scare about running out of water. We have all the water we need in the world. We have the technology to turn sea water into pure water.

Humans can do anything they want they just have to be motivated to do it. We could make all the fresh water we ever wanted if we just really wanted to do it. It would cost a lot of money for the infrastructure and energy, but we could do it.

Just drive between calgary and vancouver in the winter, at least 700 KM of snow about 3 feet in depth....lots of water!

Buy land up north people, it's the new frontier

[Devils'Advocate]

The best way to reduce population is more human rights for women. Once women have equal access to education, have the ability to read and learn, AND HAVE ACCESS TO SEXUAL HEALTH INFORMATION AND FAMILY PLANNING EDUCATION, population rates go down. In Mexico there used to be 7 children per mother. The government invested heavily in sex education and in urban areas where there is equal access to education and family planning services, that has dropped to 2.5 children per mother. In rural areas where schooling is optional there has been far less success.

But population is a tiny part of the problem. The US has 5% of the worlds population and yet it consumed $10 trillion worth of goods last year. China and India combined have a third of the worlds population and yet only consumed $2 trillion worth of goods. So we can't shake our finger at them and say "stop screwing up our planet". Each person in the industrialized world consumes about 50 to 100x the resources that a person in a third world country would.

I am a vegetarian for environmental reasons. I do not own a car and use only public transportation for environmental reasons. I was deeply involved in several environmental groups, addressed Halifax City Council on several occasions, slept in a tent at Elizabeth May's house more than once attending conferences developing policy suggestions and sharing ideas on how to mobilize people to be more involved, organized Earth Day classroom outreach programs in the schools. But I stopped being involved in these things about 5 years ago when I realized that it was a complete waste of time and effort. For each person like myself forgoing a vehicle in favor of public transportation, there are 8 people driving Hummers, most of whom do not need a vehicle half that size. As I said in my post at the beginning of this thread, people will not make the changes we need to make until there is an absolute catastrophe. No amount of environmental education and lobbying is going to beat human nature. In the words of Don Henley, "here, in the land of the free, the first words a baby learns is MORE". Until there is an absolutely brutally clear self-interest at stake, other self-interests will always take priority.

---------------------
I didn't get much out of the program that I didn't get out of "The Fire Next Time", a movie staring Craig T Nelson about global warming and water shortages causing an increase in hurricanes and crop failures and people trying to escape into Canada (as was the same in Earth 2100). The movie was made in 1993. Here we are 16 years later and we're in a worse situation now than what we were then. Most countries have ignored Kyoto. Fossil fuel use is way up, not down. Resources are being depleted at a faster rate, not slower. And I certainly believe with every fibre of my being that we will be in worse shape 16 years from now....