[Newsseeker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')e all know the world is finite. The number of atoms is finite, and these atoms combine to form a finite number of molecules. The mix of molecules may change over time, but in total, the number of molecules is also finite.

We also know that growth is central to our way of life. Businesses are expected to grow. Every day new businesses are formed and new products are developed. The world population is also growing, so all this adds up to a huge utilization of resources.

At some point, growth in resource utilization must collide with the fact that the world is finite. We have grown up thinking that the world is so large that limits will never be an issue. But now, we are starting to bump up against limits.

[jbeckton]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newsseeker', 'W')e all know the world is finite. The number of atoms is finite, and these atoms combine to form a finite number of molecules. The mix of molecules may change over time, but in total, the number of molecules is also finite.

[Newsseeker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jbeckton', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newsseeker', 'W')e all know the world is finite. The number of atoms is finite, and these atoms combine to form a finite number of molecules. The mix of molecules may change over time, but in total, the number of molecules is also finite.

[jbeckton]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newsseeker', 'W')e all know the world is finite. The number of atoms is finite, and these atoms combine to form a finite number of molecules. The mix of molecules may change over time, but in total, the number of molecules is also finite.

[Sheb]

Quantities are either finite or they are infinite. Good point about the asteroids and comets--however, these simply that the earth by itself is not a closed system. Unsteadiness of a quantity has no effict on its finiteness.

However, even the quantities of matter change over the eons does not make those quantities non-finite. They remain as limited as ever. In fact, most current geological science holds that the earth is 7.35x10^22 kg lighter than it was when formed--The moon.

Even a petri dish in a lab incubator is not a closed system. But it *is* finite. So how will Baccilus Sapiens fare when our blue-green petridish is more than half full?

So, yes it's a problem. But it's the self-correcting type. Any out there think we already passed "half full" (half with respect to the *maximum* possible population)?

[MrMambo]

There was a "limits to growth" debate back in the 70ties wich took this debate and came up with rather rational conclutions. However the reagonomics era in wich we are still living did its best to ignore the physical realities of our earth system. The result has been that we have not used the time efficiently to try and convert to a sustainable economy. The richer nations of the world in general stopped pouring resources into renewable energy, recycling systems, low-energy transport infrastructure (rail and public transportations etc), and the like.

Instead governments around the world did their best to maximize material consumption and financial economic growth for the elites, and central banks helped oil the machienery through creating debth based asset boubles wich has popped only to be replaced by new ones.

This has all been going on through a fast draining of key natural resources and the world as a whole has seemed to b blind to how these natural resources would eventually start to show signs of depletion.

Through the times there have been many examples of local depletion of resources, but humans have always been able to explore more of the world to utlize, finding vast amounts of new resources. Growth on the world scale seemed to be endless.

Now it seems as this era has ended. We are now looking at a world fully explored, where the global limits to further material growth is looking us streight in the face. Global level depletion of mineral reserves are gradually turning into reality and not only theroy. Global level limits to agricultural production also seems to materialize. River systems increasingly does not reach the ocean, and ground water reservoirs have increasingly been pumped dry. Fishing is going on faster than fish stocks renew.

And as everyone on this board already know oil and gass is definately showing signs of depletion.

The success of mankind now rests on our ability to handle the challenge of bumping up against all theese global level material limits. Are we able to convert to a form of physically sustainable way of life? If we totally fail this basic challenge it doesnt help if we solve all other challenges we might face, the material basis of our existence will be gone.

[Valdemar]

The rampant destruction of the biosphere will curb growth by itself. You cannot maintain a macroscale species like Homo sapiens when your biosphere is only tolerable to bacteria at the end of the day.

We will never use all the iron on Earth, but that doesn't mean we will continue perpetuating the species on this rock indefinitely, ever growing. We're going to need an extra Earth to accomodate a Westernised China and India, so imagine the rest of the world fully industrialised.

And people laugh at those who want to spend money on the concept of colonising and terraforming places like Mars and Titan or building O'Neill Island-3 space colonies.

[Newsseeker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Valdemar', 'T')he rampant destruction of the biosphere will curb growth by itself. You cannot maintain a macroscale species like Homo sapiens when your biosphere is only tolerable to bacteria at the end of the day.

We will never use all the iron on Earth, but that doesn't mean we will continue perpetuating the species on this rock indefinitely, ever growing. We're going to need an extra Earth to accomodate a Westernised China and India, so imagine the rest of the world fully industrialised.

And people laugh at those who want to spend money on the concept of colonising and terraforming places like Mars and Titan or building O'Neill Island-3 space colonies.

[Leanan]

The person who wrote this is "Gail the Actuary" from TheOilDrum.com.

As you might guess from her nick, she works in the insurance industry. So she comes to peak oil from a different background than many of us (who tend to be either engineering/scientist/technical types, or treehugger hippie types).

She's written some very good peak oil materials, for insurance professionals, and for the general public (including stuff that can be used as lesson plans for teaching kids). IMO, we need more like her: people who can not only understand the peak oil issue, but can communicate it well.

[Valdemar]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newsseeker', '
')
I saw that movie with Val Kilmer, Red Planet, and it is based on the idea that earth gets so polluted that we have to move to Mars. If the behavioral changes are not made and man cntinues to consume and pollute beyond his limits no planet would suffice for colonization because, in time, it, too would become polluted beyond all repair. Man has become like a cancer taking in more than there is to go around and in due time will reap the consequences.

[Kylon]

The Solution is genetic change to allow us to live in more environments.

Making our bodies handle the pollution better.

But it won't happen any time soon. That would be considered too politically incorrect.