| Pages:
1
2 |
NaK
Hazard to Self
Posts: 83
Registered: 12-9-2019
Member Is Offline
|
|
What are the humans supposed to do when everything is automated and every problem solved? In my opinion it's a great thing that earth is always posing
challenges to humanity like running out resources, climate change, even pandemics. They all are terrible in the moment but ensure that humanity will
progress and have something to do other than warfare
|
|
|
metalresearcher
National Hazard
Posts: 757
Registered: 7-9-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: Reactive
|
|
I think the biggest problem is country thinking. People tend to think in countries, not as mankind. The result is that one says 'our country does this
...' in many cases ignoring what others do. Countries claim resources which are in their area, while resources (food, minerals, energy) belong to all
of us. The result is that rich countries keep most for themselves, which created inequality and poverty.
Another result is that rich, developed countries have on a per capita basis, much more carbon footprint hence they are much less energy / resource
efficient. Actually this is even worse than official statistics, as our products are manufactured in low wages countries where environmental
regulations are lax. And much of our waste (plastics, e-waste) is exported to countries like Ghana or India where poor workers are inhaling HNO3 and
HCl fumes, deprived from any PPE, to recover gold from our electronics crap which we tend to renew each few years, despite properly working devices.
For these global problems we have to work more together and not each country on its own.
|
|
|
karlos³
International Hazard
Posts: 1520
Registered: 10-1-2011
Location: yes!
Member Is Offline
Mood: oxazolidinic 8)
|
|
I've read that oil is actually likely produced via abiotical means, that even oil wells who are expected to be run out "magically" fill up again.
I know this is opposed to the general "fossile fuel" theory, but that fossile fuel theory has neither been proved to be correct.
We don't actually put cretacean forests and dinosaur remains in our cars.
There are actually a few books about it going into detail about this topic.
|
|
|
Fyndium
International Hazard
Posts: 1192
Registered: 12-7-2020
Location: Not in USA
Member Is Offline
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by draculic acid69  | Problem with nuclear power is the danger that goes with it.
It only takes one fukup and the next thing U know we're abandoning entire cities and eating radioactive tuna.something with such a low margin of error
and such a high,long lasting and wide reaching level of damage imo isn't worth the benefits. At least with current methods.it has a big upside but a
huge risk and until that risk is severely diminished nuclear is a risky bet.its already gone wrong a few times. How many more "accidents" can we
afford before an entire country or continent is Chernobylized. |
The outcome to human health is greatly exaggerated. Now that we have actual epidemiological data, we can assess that the effect of nuclear accident
have surprisingly little impact on health statistics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster#Long-term_r...
Also one must keep in mind that one big accident is much easier to demonize than insidious damage caused by particulate pollution, for example. It is
well researched fact that they kill:
"PM pollution is estimated to cause 22,000–52,000 deaths per year in the United States (from 2000)[69] contributed to ~370,000 premature deaths in
Europe during 2005.[70] and 3.22 million deaths globally in 2010 per the global burden of disease collaboration.[71]"
When people speak that hundreds or thousands have been killed by something tragic and something must be done, I usually just sigh. When I tell people
these numbers, they usually just ignore and change topic. It's not too seldom I feel that most people are just ignorant and straight out idiots. This
is a pathway to my favorite topic about society and it's overreacting restrictions.
Numbers are what fool people. When 500 000 looks like a huge number, it derives from a population pool of 500 million, so one person per thousand will
have a prematurely predated life expentancy reduction. This gets even more complicated when we look into more details, and we see that people who are
in general poor health will be usually the ones who drop from those extra factors. Same applies to covid epidemic: over 99% of severe complications
have occured to people who have at least one serious underlying health condition. And again, when we put 500 million people on the line, someone in
20's at their best shape of their life will drop dead, and be used as example that it will pose immediate danger to life to everyone. For a fact, I
know that almost 10 times more people aged 25 dies in a year on average to cancer than corona in my country.
I think understanding scale of things is one of the most important aspect when assessing these matters. It needs a good skill of out of the box
thinking, as people view the world from their perspective, which can alter the perception a lot.
|
|
|
nitro-genes
International Hazard
Posts: 1048
Registered: 5-4-2005
Member Is Offline
|
|
IIRC, if every country would derive all of its energy needs from nuclear power, we would only have enough fissionable material for like what, 2 years
or so?
About the risks of nuclear power plants.... anyone seen the series "chernobyl"? Scariest part of it is that none of the claims made in this series
were exaggerated. Cesium 137 is some nasty shit.
People can say all risk factors can be eliminated huh...so what happened at Fukushima then? Of course Japan was able to largely contain the
radioactive material, because it still funtioned as a country. But what if a war would break out, and nuclear powerplants would be targeted,
deliberately or just by accident? Or a much more dramatic natural disaster, like happened at Fukushima? Would a country then be able to mitigate the
damage?
|
|
|
arkoma
Redneck Overlord
Posts: 1761
Registered: 3-2-2014
Location: On a Big Blue Marble hurtling through space
Member Is Offline
Mood: украї́нська
|
|
Countries go to war over energy supplies alone.
Fission power would be a stop gap at best.
PLENTY of Silicon on this large rock. Plenty of Solar insolation.
Some of y'all been hanging around with Eeyore I think.
| Quote: | | generally characterized as a pessimistic, gloomy, depressed, anhedonic, old grey stuffed donkey who is a friend of the title character,
Winnie-the-Pooh. |
Wikipedia
"We believe the knowledge and cultural heritage of mankind should be accessible to all people around the world, regardless of their wealth, social
status, nationality, citizenship, etc" z-lib
|
|
|
draculic acid69
International Hazard
Posts: 1371
Registered: 2-8-2018
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by metalresearcher | I think the biggest problem is country thinking. People tend to think in countries, not as mankind. The result is that one says 'our country does this
...' in many cases ignoring what others do. Countries claim resources which are in their area, while resources (food, minerals, energy) belong to all
of us. The result is that rich countries keep most for themselves, which created inequality and poverty.
Another result is that rich, developed countries have on a per capita basis, much more carbon footprint hence they are much less energy / resource
efficient. Actually this is even worse than official statistics, as our products are manufactured in low wages countries where environmental
regulations are lax. And much of our waste (plastics, e-waste) is exported to countries like Ghana or India where poor workers are inhaling HNO3 and
HCl fumes, deprived from any PPE, to recover gold from our electronics crap which we tend to renew each few years, despite properly working devices.
For these global problems we have to work more together and not each country on its own.
|
I think povertys biggest cause is mismanagement/war/controlling gov regimes/ruling government greed/ systemic corruption rather than being resource
poor. Kim Jong un has hundreds of billions of dollars to himself while n.koreans r eating grass.the n.k. gov literally handed out a
booklet on which grasses are edible.russia isn't resource poor but bcoz everysingle person with a scrap of power had there handout for bribes and
anyone with resources auctions it off to the highest bidder while the average person gets nothing.The u.s.a can't even keep streetlights on,keep
schools open,look after its return soldiers or provide health care bcoz of the gov spending 60cents out of every tax dollar on military expensive.
Africa has all sorts of problems from Warlords and governments killing everyone and taking there stuff to corruption to greedy governments to lack of
resources to lack of industry/to lack of any sort of infrastructure that could support basic trade/economy to support a population.poverty is rarely
caused by rich/developed countries
[Edited on 7-3-2021 by draculic acid69]
|
|
|
draculic acid69
International Hazard
Posts: 1371
Registered: 2-8-2018
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by arkoma | Countries go to war over energy supplies alone.
Fission power would be a stop gap at best.
PLENTY of Silicon on this large rock. Plenty of Solar insolation.
Some of y'all been hanging around with Eeyore I think.
| Quote: | | generally characterized as a pessimistic, gloomy, depressed, anhedonic, old grey stuffed donkey who is a friend of the title character,
Winnie-the-Pooh. |
Wikipedia |
What kind of name is Winnie the Pooh anyway. What kind of deviant sex act got him
labelled a "Pooh bear"?
|
|
|
Texium
Administrator
Posts: 4580
Registered: 11-1-2014
Location: Salt Lake City
Member Is Offline
Mood: PhD candidate!
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Fyndium |
"PM pollution is estimated to cause 22,000–52,000 deaths per year in the United States (from 2000)[69] contributed to ~370,000 premature deaths in
Europe during 2005.[70] and 3.22 million deaths globally in 2010 per the global burden of disease collaboration.[71]"
When people speak that hundreds or thousands have been killed by something tragic and something must be done, I usually just sigh. When I tell people
these numbers, they usually just ignore and change topic. It's not too seldom I feel that most people are just ignorant and straight out idiots. This
is a pathway to my favorite topic about society and it's overreacting restrictions.
Numbers are what fool people. When 500 000 looks like a huge number, it derives from a population pool of 500 million, so one person per thousand will
have a prematurely predated life expentancy reduction. This gets even more complicated when we look into more details, and we see that people who are
in general poor health will be usually the ones who drop from those extra factors. Same applies to covid epidemic: over 99% of severe complications
have occured to people who have at least one serious underlying health condition. And again, when we put 500 million people on the line, someone in
20's at their best shape of their life will drop dead, and be used as example that it will pose immediate danger to life to everyone. For a fact, I
know that almost 10 times more people aged 25 dies in a year on average to cancer than corona in my country.
I think understanding scale of things is one of the most important aspect when assessing these matters. It needs a good skill of out of the box
thinking, as people view the world from their perspective, which can alter the perception a lot. |
While I
agree with you about nuclear power, I can't let your analogy to the pandemic go unanswered, as it is highly flawed. The comparisons that you make are
completely fallacious. It doesn't matter whether cancer kills more people than covid (and by the way, in the US, covid is actually catching up with
cancer deaths). You can't catch cancer from somebody, so obviously there aren't public health measures that are needed to contain it. We spend
billions of dollars each year searching for treatments and cures, though, so it isn't like it's being ignored. And as for particulate matter
pollution, yes, it's obviously a problem and it shouldn't be ignored. But right now covid is killing 10 times as many people in the US, so to worry
about that right now is to fix a tiny leak in your ship after it just got torpedoed. And once again, you're trying to compare a disease that is
impossible to prevent unless you want to go live in some isolated pristine wilderness for the rest of your life, to a highly contagious virus that
will rip through any population that doesn't take precautions.
I also happen to believe that people who are not healthy and in their 20s have every right to NOT die of covid. You make it sound as if they don't
really matter. I am healthy and in my 20s but there are people who I care about who are elderly, or obese, or immunocompromised, and I don't want to
risk transmitting a disease to them that has a high chance of killing them. The fact that you are able to have such a flippant attitude about it is
proof that these "overreacting restrictions" WORK. A year ago people scoffed at covid as "just a little flu." If everyone kept treating it that way
we'd be far worse off now than we are. I believe that your perspective of being "Not in USA" has affected your perception on this matter, as unless
you live in Brazil, you are most likely somewhere that has handled the pandemic with sensible restrictions, and people have generally complied with
them.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
