the earth cant keep doing us favours
With humanity's huge impact on the planet's climate becoming ever clearer, we need to go back several million years. Because climate-related news of history being made are about the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) reaching 400 parts per million (ppm). The last time CO2 was this high was probably 4.5 million years ago, before modern humans even existed.
Throughout recorded history, up till the Industrial Revolution, CO2 was much lower at around 280 ppm. But large-scale industrial and agricultural activity since then has seen humanity profoundly alter the make-up of the atmosphere and even the stability of Earth's climate.
'We are creating a prehistoric climate in which human societies will face huge and potentially catastrophic risks,' said Bob Ward, policy director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change at the London School of Economics.
According to Bob Watson, former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and former UK government chief scientific adviser:
'the world is now most likely committed to an increase in surface temperature of 3C-5C compared to pre-industrial times.'
Sagan, in 1966, adressing the Fermi paradox (why haven't we contacted alien life in the universe yet?), said that technological civilizations may usually or invariably destroy themselves before or shortly after developing radio or space flight technology.
Possible means of annihilation include nuclear war, biological warfare or accidental contamination, climate change, nanotechnological catastrophe, ill-advised physics experiments, a badly programmed super-intelligence, or a Malthusian catastrophe after the deterioration of a planet's ecosphere
Actually Splitt I agree with you this time. Does a family really need two cars? A/C on 24 hours a day, more food than they can eat, 3 international holidays a year. A house full of electrical appliances which are basically toys.... of course not.
what is lower std of living?? Not buying things we dont really need?? More sharing? Not a bad philosophy. Yes?
Thelo I don't think it is possible to have the same energy output using renewables than the current fossil fuel arrangment. Yes we could go 100% renewable within 10 years but people would have to accept a lower standard of living for that to happen.
Is more likely to be saying "keep this up and soon it will be pay back time!"... And this is one of those times where playing the blame game will just not cut it.
Brit - the world bank put out a report last year stating we are heading for 4 degree rise by end of century because of us. Case in point - mass extinction. Adaption is not an option and the throw away line "reality of life" completely dismisses man's hand in this down fall.
The earth has always had fluctuations of temperatures. Some will adapt, others will die. Such is the reality of life.
Rip - ahh the old population argument. How many earth do we need if we all lived like americans??
That’s Why more and more countries now are changing to CNG and other environmental friendly fuel for transportation.
Every small bit counts for a sustainable future!!
I think the problem is not so much human activity but the fact we have too many humans. If we could reduce the population to about 2 billion it would be much more sustainable that the current 7 billion. However certain religions such as Catholics and Islam cause much damage but outlawing contraception and promoting large families. (We know they do this to boost their numbers but it has a large impact on the earth's resources.)