Suppose that in 50 years time we are getting all of our energy from solar, wind, hydro and other renewables and most of our water from desalination and recycling. Electricity and food would be more expensive, but probably not prohibitive. What then would limit our population growth? Is it simply not feasible to support large scale agriculture from water that is desalinated and pumped inland using renewable energy sources?

Nutrient losses are the next big issue (ie desertification), that and farming practices in general. Currently we use some 1.5kJ of energy to produce 1kJ of energy in the form of food. Those numbers do not add up. Furthermore, we ignore the natural means by which nutrient and trace elements are delivered to plants through the decomposition process and bacterial activity in general. Instead we manufacture nutrients and trace elements in factories at high energy consumption and inject them directly into the soil where they only wash away since there is no biological activity to sustain them.

Arable land will run out, we (stupid as we are) will likely cut down more forests to create more land, thus accelerating the losses of topsoil through erosion, decreasing rainfall, decreasing biodiversity and so on. Arable land will be the next big ticket item.

Buy organic wherever you can, grow your own food if you can, or at least find a local farmers market and find the organic grocers. Again, costs will be higher, but this is reality. Burning 50% more energy than we can produce in the form of food is not sustainable.

I predict that this issue will hit us sooner than you think, perhaps 5-10 years from now. I accurately predicted the current water crisis some 4 years ago too (not that it was hard to see...but people are stupid!)

maybe our social respopnsibility will tend for us to not increase.
Birth rates are dropping.

Yes, I could well see problems with the farming methods we use.  Sooner rahter than later too.

Permaculture works. Imagine if the councils planted fruting tees instead of nonproductive one s ?

The chooks in my old permaculture garden were perfect. They loved it and looked right.

My brother on Mt Mee has water tanks, they have had the water truck up once in 6 years. 
No drain on the "system" at all

Zoso - what a great council !
Was a permaculture idea I read about. Good on them

Sort of a "can't lose" move they have done, as I see it.
They were going to plant trees anyway.
If these ones don't produce, so what, the others sure would never !

had councils planted fruiting trrees 20 years ago, imagine the streets/parks now

I am SUCH a dreamer - love it

ABC a couple nights ago and Scientists according to this report are now saying that it is not to late OR too costly to curb global warming. China is fast becoming the worlds biggest polluter and the Government is still divvying up who did what when and why.With the immense amount of emmissions being produced by China if we dont get them to get on board soon, every effort will fail, as they produce, or will, twice as much as other developing countries, including us the US and India put together.

The Scientists believe the worlds economies can afford to tackle climate change and that ity is not too late to halt the damage if we start NOW!!!!

I agree. We need to get the Australian government on board before we can start looking overseas. China is using Australia as an excuse not to do any more to curb emissions, which is entirely fair. They have already done more than us.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/China-warns-on-spreading-deserts-threat/2007/07/12/1183833690235.html

Spreading deserts are the main environmental challenge holding back China's sustainable development and the situation remains serious despite some improvements, the government said.

Deserts, which cover a fifth of China, are spreading on the upper reaches of the Yellow River, on the Qinghai-Tibet plateau and parts of Inner Mongolia and Gansu, the forestry ministry said in a statement on its website.

"Experts say that the series of anti-desertification measures our country has taken has obtained obvious results, which have had an important effect on improving people's livelihood," it said.

"But at present the anti-desertification situation remains serious, and is still the main ecological problem which restricts our sustainable socio-economic development," the ministry added.

"Stepping up control efforts is of the utmost urgency."

Thanks Jasin - it is interesting to look back.

The changes are:
a huge uptake of solar cells on the roofs of houses &
much higher energy prices.

zoso wrote on May 5^th, 2007 at 1:39pm:


Another ones of those people who prefer to look at per capita emissions instead of total emissions.

Australia is a net carbon dioxide sink, something that (some) other countries are trying to achieve.

I honestly think 'Forests, Jungles, etc' will be a thing of the past soon.
Maybe in little contained 'Parks & Reserves' where you can hike to any edge of them in a day.

Strange how we cover the most fertile areas with cement and tar.

lee wrote on Oct 18^th, 2019 at 12:17pm:



No it isn't

lee wrote on Oct 19^th, 2019 at 11:18am:


You are the one making the claim that Australia is a net carbon dioxide sink.
The onus is on you to provide evidence

I won't say it's wrong, but i will say that it is misleading (as is always the case with deniers)

Perhaps the biggest deception is using the year 2010.
It just happens to be the year after the 2009 Black Saturday bushfires and 2010 represents the end of the Millennial drought.
Lots of plant regrowth skewing the results.

Australia is highly urbanised yet the map doesn't show how much CO2 Sydney and Melbourne actually emits so is pretty meaningless.

So in summary this doesn't show that Australia is a net carbon dioxide sink.

BTW - According to the garudian graphic the 2010 CO2e for the year was ......560.4Mt

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/dec/11/australias-transport-emissio...

How could they get that so egregiously wrong  .. the satellite of course it couldn't be the garudian or from where they derived their data.

lee wrote on Oct 19^th, 2019 at 12:50pm:


Wow, I didn't realise that you were so stupid that I would have to spell it out for you

record rains in 2010 after bushfires and a long drought made for huge amounts of regrowth which made Australia (temporarily) a carbon sink

Quote:


So it looks like whatsupwiththat cherry picked a particularly favorable year
But that's no surprise as it's the MO for deniers


So now that we are in one of our worst droughts on record what do you think are the chances that we are still a net carbon sink 

zoso wrote on May 5^th, 2007 at 1:39pm:


Lead the way buddy get rid of

mobile phone
I-pad
Computer
No electricity in your house
No cars or trains trams or buses only push bikes
No aeroplanes
No tv or entertainment that uses power.
No plastic products
Everything has to be done manually.

Might as well live in a cave.

You wiling to show the way.

BTW Australian emits 1% of manmade greenhouse gases which is absorbed by Australia eco-systems..

Wake the f@rk up and stop listening to the oligarchy.

The_Barnacle wrote on Oct 20^th, 2019 at 10:59am:

Zoso will be back like the Wrath of Khan.

C02 levels have risen.
Methane levels have risen.

Is it man-made or natural occurance that is due??