Random, Random 2.0

All the other crazy stuff we talk about. Politics, Science, News, the Kitchen, other hobbies.
User avatar
Suliso Latvia
Posts: 4404
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 2:30 pm
Location: Basel, Switzerland
Has thanked: 273 times
Been thanked: 1453 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#1201

Post by Suliso »

The overall amount of water on the planet (including ice) is obviously not going to change. The question only is where it goes...
User avatar
ponchi101 Venezuela
Site Admin
Posts: 14722
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2020 4:40 pm
Location: New Macondo
Has thanked: 3857 times
Been thanked: 5565 times
Contact:

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#1202

Post by ponchi101 »

Owendonovan wrote: Tue Aug 16, 2022 12:11 pm I mostly feel it's too late with the climate.
If nothing is done.
The problem (or rather, one of the problems) is that it has become some sort "test" for being good or bad. You drive your Tesla? You are a good person. You drive your Hummer? You are evil. The reality is that it is very easy for people in developed countries to ask for reductions in emissions, while at the same time, they expect those reductions to happen as if by miracle, and somewhere else. We simply cannot change to 100% Wind and Solar; they are too unreliable (even the Tesla megafactory is connected to the grid). You cannot build stable economies based on them. Meanwhile, the most reliable AND clean source of energy keeps being attacked: Germany has almost completely shut down all of its Nuclear reactors, but most of those have been replaced with coal, an evil trade if there ever was one. NYC shut down Indian Point, a reliable, small plant, and California will be shutting down Diablo Canyon, all in the name of climate, but what will replace them?
It is not too late. There are some interesting geo-engineering projects that would help. Replacing coal for natural gas would have an immediate effect, and those are reliable technologies. But, planning on reductions by leaving developing economies stagnated will not work. China needs about 1 new plant a WEEK, to feed its economy; it is choosing coal. India also needs more power to allow its growing population to have a decent life, and India has considerable coal. It is choosing that path.
If the world is serious, it can be done. CC can be managed. But it will take some serious effort.
(Remember, I am unemployed and work/used to work in Oil and Gas, so all my opinions have to take that into consideration).
Ego figere omnia et scio supellectilem
User avatar
AcesAnnie United States of America
Posts: 267
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2022 7:08 pm
Location: Va.
Has thanked: 27 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#1203

Post by AcesAnnie »

Owendonovan wrote: Tue Aug 16, 2022 12:11 pm I mostly feel it's too late with the climate.
I don't necessarily think so. I may not see a remarkable improvement over the remainder of my lifetime, but my hopes are with the younger generation and the progress that will be made in the future regarding climate change and the environment it will make a better future for the likes of even my kids who are both in their 20's and, especially my 1 year old granddaughter.
User avatar
Suliso Latvia
Posts: 4404
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 2:30 pm
Location: Basel, Switzerland
Has thanked: 273 times
Been thanked: 1453 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#1204

Post by Suliso »

The goodness of nuclear reactors is sadly greatly exaggerated. There is of course the issue of waste, but besides that is the immense cost and time needed to construct a new one up to the best possible safety standards. Look up how UK is doing on this front in the link below... Virtually all nuclear reactors in the developed world are 20+ years old...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinkley_P ... er_station

There is a talk about small nuclear reactors and various new technologies, but not a single one is certified and/or under construction.
User avatar
ponchi101 Venezuela
Site Admin
Posts: 14722
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2020 4:40 pm
Location: New Macondo
Has thanked: 3857 times
Been thanked: 5565 times
Contact:

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#1205

Post by ponchi101 »

Sometime in this November, we will reach inhabitant 8 billion on the planet. I believe this is an undercount, as many areas of China, India and Africa cannot keep reliable censuses, but that point is irrelevant. The projections have changed and we will plateau at about 9 billion, somewhere in the 2030's. World population will then start decreasing, if current replacement levels remain the same. Of course, the decrease will be slower than the increase.
In the famous Thomas Friedmann example, even if we were only to give each one of those new 1 BB people coming in nothing but a 50 watt lightbulb, we will need 50 Billion watts of new energy production. In reality, we will need to increase our energy production from about 4.5 Terawatts to 6 TW by then, JUST to keep current standards. If we want to bring those new 1 BB people into middle class levels of lifestyle, PLUS bring some more out of poverty (of the ones already here), that is the target. But, if we decide to do that with wind and solar, there are some sobering stats. To power the USA just with Wind, you would need an area the size of California, and that would mean constant wind, and no wind shadow to account for (the phenomenon of a front turbine taking wind off a back one). Europe would require more. S. America and Africa less but being larger, we would need better transmission lines (the same as the USA). And, if we wanted to use solar, we would need to install batteries for the obvious: night. In Scandinavian countries, we would need to store power on a 2:1 ratio because, during the winter, that is the day/night ratio (more or less). The largest home battery available is the Tesla Powerwall, rated at about 9KW (Tesla is very secretive about its real capacity; its page says nothing about that). 9KW with be enough to keep one heater going, for about 6 hours, in a regular 1st world household. Imagine just the number of powerwalls needed. Imagine the resources needed to build all these batteries.

My 31 yo niece is very ambivalent on whether to have a child; she lives in Argentina, that country is going to pieces, and she does not know if she wants to bring a child to this world (she DOES want children). Her brother says no way (he is 33). In the next few years, many young couples will face that decision too.
Again, geo-engineering can do it. It will take considerable expertise, political will AND ENERGY. Moving water is a very difficult thing to do, and we will need to do that.
So: Maybe SOYLENT GREEN was not too far off the mark. It just did not understand what the real consequences of 9 billion would be (Soylent Green expected a world of 12 billion).
Ego figere omnia et scio supellectilem
User avatar
ponchi101 Venezuela
Site Admin
Posts: 14722
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2020 4:40 pm
Location: New Macondo
Has thanked: 3857 times
Been thanked: 5565 times
Contact:

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#1206

Post by ponchi101 »

Suliso wrote: Tue Aug 16, 2022 3:06 pm The goodness of nuclear reactors is sadly greatly exaggerated. There is of course the issue of waste, but besides that is the immense cost and time needed to construct a new one up to the best possible safety standards. Look up how UK is doing on this front in the link below... Virtually all nuclear reactors in the developed world are 20+ years old...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinkley_P ... er_station

There is a talk about small nuclear reactors and various new technologies, but not a single one is certified and/or under construction.
Agree. They are complex machines, and the red tape is very long.
Thorium nuclear is still being looked at. But by now, decommissioning working reactors is foolish. Because we don't know what will happen with nuclear (not completely) but we do know what will happen with CC.
Ego figere omnia et scio supellectilem
User avatar
ti-amie United States of America
Posts: 22984
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 4:44 pm
Location: The Boogie Down, NY
Has thanked: 5302 times
Been thanked: 3284 times

Honorary_medal

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#1207

Post by ti-amie »

“Do not grow old, no matter how long you live. Never cease to stand like curious children before the Great Mystery into which we were born.” Albert Einstein
User avatar
ti-amie United States of America
Posts: 22984
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 4:44 pm
Location: The Boogie Down, NY
Has thanked: 5302 times
Been thanked: 3284 times

Honorary_medal

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#1208

Post by ti-amie »

“Do not grow old, no matter how long you live. Never cease to stand like curious children before the Great Mystery into which we were born.” Albert Einstein
User avatar
ti-amie United States of America
Posts: 22984
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 4:44 pm
Location: The Boogie Down, NY
Has thanked: 5302 times
Been thanked: 3284 times

Honorary_medal

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#1209

Post by ti-amie »

“Do not grow old, no matter how long you live. Never cease to stand like curious children before the Great Mystery into which we were born.” Albert Einstein
User avatar
Suliso Latvia
Posts: 4404
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 2:30 pm
Location: Basel, Switzerland
Has thanked: 273 times
Been thanked: 1453 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#1210

Post by Suliso »

ponchi101 wrote: Tue Aug 16, 2022 3:14 pm
My 31 yo niece is very ambivalent on whether to have a child; she lives in Argentina, that country is going to pieces, and she does not know if she wants to bring a child to this world (she DOES want children). Her brother says no way (he is 33). In the next few years, many young couples will face that decision too.
As strange as it may sound right now there probably will be a serious issue of population collapse by the end of the century in all but the most poor areas. Governments will struggle to encourage couples to have more children. China is possibly decreasing already and if not will start to in 5-10 years. India will follow in 50 years or so. Modern middle class Indians rarely have more than one child. Not because they think too much about world future, but because they can't afford to educate more.

In principle it would be great to have 1/2 or 1/3 of the current world population. Problem is that in the medium term you end up with an enormous number of old people. Very bad for any economic or scientific development.
User avatar
ponchi101 Venezuela
Site Admin
Posts: 14722
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2020 4:40 pm
Location: New Macondo
Has thanked: 3857 times
Been thanked: 5565 times
Contact:

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#1211

Post by ponchi101 »

Suliso wrote: Wed Aug 17, 2022 4:46 am ...

As strange as it may sound right now there probably will be a serious issue of population collapse by the end of the century in all but the most poor areas. Governments will struggle to encourage couples to have more children. China is possibly decreasing already and if not will start to in 5-10 years. India will follow in 50 years or so. Modern middle class Indians rarely have more than one child. Not because they think too much about world future, but because they can't afford to educate more.

In principle it would be great to have 1/2 or 1/3 of the current world population. Problem is that in the medium term you end up with an enormous number of old people. Very bad for any economic or scientific development.
I went out last night with an old friend. During a long conversation, we talked about both our decision not to have children. We honestly do not regret it.
I am sure that there must be some serious emotional rewards; but the financial and societal pressures must be enormous. As you say, if in India the problem is the affordability to educate one, imagine the rest of the nations.
There will be some other interesting problems. How about real estate? What happens to prices when there are more houses that people want? That could be a huge collapse, unless you start a program of demolishing such houses. But then, you are wiping out value from the area where you would do that.
I guess we will have to imagine it (or I will; won't live to see it).
Ego figere omnia et scio supellectilem
User avatar
Suliso Latvia
Posts: 4404
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 2:30 pm
Location: Basel, Switzerland
Has thanked: 273 times
Been thanked: 1453 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#1212

Post by Suliso »

Even in the distant past not everyone chose to have children (I don't have any either). There were monasteries etc for that. In my opinion if you want to encourage people to have more children it's a lot easier to incentivize those who have one to have two and those with two three. It is not a problem to be laughed about - otherwise in about 5-6 centuries there is nobody left or almost nobody.
User avatar
AcesAnnie United States of America
Posts: 267
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2022 7:08 pm
Location: Va.
Has thanked: 27 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#1213

Post by AcesAnnie »

It is extremely expensive to raise kids. Even when I was raising my 2 children who are now 26 and 24 years of age it was not cheap at all. Now my 26 year old son and his wife have a 1 year old daughter, and I can only imagine how expensive it is today. My husband and I help with purchasing clothes for the baby because she outgrows them so quickly, but young adults now especially don't want to or can't afford to raise a huge family.
User avatar
ponchi101 Venezuela
Site Admin
Posts: 14722
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2020 4:40 pm
Location: New Macondo
Has thanked: 3857 times
Been thanked: 5565 times
Contact:

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#1214

Post by ponchi101 »

George Friedman said it: nowadays, having children is one of the worst FINANCIAL mistakes you can make.
(Again, financial. He was not discussing the emotional aspects).
@Suliso. Stating the obvious but: in the past, those special scenarios were the exception. Everybody else had children, who then proceeded to die due to diseases and such.
But that problem will be a problem for the 22nd century. Right now, it is the opposite (we know).
Ego figere omnia et scio supellectilem
User avatar
Suliso Latvia
Posts: 4404
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 2:30 pm
Location: Basel, Switzerland
Has thanked: 273 times
Been thanked: 1453 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#1215

Post by Suliso »

Yes, of course. The point I was trying to make is that it's mighty difficult to keep the population stable peacefully. It's either one extreme or the other...

As for financially I kind of agree. For a young couple definitely. My own mom and dad didn't make the two of us for financial reasons (I think :D), but now in the old age they do have a financial safety net from us in case their pensions are not enough anymore for some reason. Lots of old people in Latvia who don't have anyone are struggling very much. I imagine in South America even more so.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest