First let me say I am on the fence. If I were on a debate team…I could happily take either side.

I have all kinds of theories as to when I believe humanity reached its peak and why.

But, the one thing I am fairly certain of is this: The earth has a finite capacity, if for no other reason…water. All the technology that one can dream up…will not change that.

As I see it…the only way humanity survived was to reach a balance with what the earth can provide. I don’t see humanity being able to achieve that balance.

I see technology like an opioid. It can bring life saving pain relief in proper doses with measured and relevant application but uncontrolled it brings fictitious ecstasy and deadly asphyxiation with an uncontrollable thirst for more.

While it has done good…much of what it is wrong in the world is due ‘to’ it as well.

Well, if your end of the world theory is correct, desalination technology will solve the water problem.

So....your theory has problems.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
Well, if your end of the world theory is correct, desalination technology will solve the water problem.

So....your theory has problems.

Heh. A fellow named David Criswell wrote a paper awhile back analyzing the possibilities for a 20-terawatt world. One of the conclusions was that there might not be enough fresh water for once-through cooling of nuclear reactors. His proposal was for moon-based solar power with the hardware built from lunar regolith in lights-out factories on-site.

Ed McCullough proposed a thorium reactor at the site of a closing nuclear power plant on the coast, for desalinization. Might be a good start.

Our congressional nitwits are still squabbling over why the climate is warming, the MP in a recent video is beyond that and thinking about what to do about it. Shipping companies with skin in the game are planning Arctic routes, Russians are planning to drill in places where it just wasn't possible before, wildlife is migrating north where it can, and just to higher elevations where it can't. And we're still using uranium reactors so we can build nuclear weapons (that we dare not use), instead of finishing the development of thorium reactors and space-based solar power.

He’s right.

All desalination does is move the endpoint some.

Add to that what is the unintended consequence of mass desalination to the environment?

There is a carrying capacity. We can move it some with technology, but there is a finite amount.

Do we want to extinguish all other life on this planet just to allow more people? That’s the potential endgame with technology- we are able to utilize everything with 100% efficiency. Even then, there is a hard cap somewhere. It may be much larger than we currently think possible - think something like a Dyson Sphere or a ringworld out of SF, but even so, until we get off the planet, it’s the old one pasture concept.

The problem is that we are now getting to the point where we are planning on improved technology without actually knowing what the improvement will be.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
He’s right.

All desalination does is move the endpoint some.

Add to that what is the unintended consequence of mass desalination to the environment?

There is a carrying capacity. We can move it some with technology, but there is a finite amount.

Do we want to extinguish all other life on this planet just to allow more people? That’s the potential endgame with technology- we are able to utilize everything with 100% efficiency. Even then, there is a hard cap somewhere. It may be much larger than we currently think possible - think something like a Dyson Sphere or a ringworld out of SF, but even so, until we get off the planet, it’s the old one pasture concept.

The problem is that we are now getting to the point where we are planning on improved technology without actually knowing what the improvement will be.

Maybe right now that's all it does. Hence, the value of technology. I have no doubt that intensive efforts to solve the problems associated with desalination would greatly increase the chances of solving the problem of freshwater being finite.

Water might be one issue, but food will be the one that hits first.

Countries like NZ and Canada seem hell bent on destroying farming.

Right now NZs population of 5 million produces food for 45 million people. Over the next 10 years look to see that reduce by around 10 million I reckon.

On that note, one technology we really need is the ability to clean our effluent from urban waste systems. There are so many chemical compounds from medicines and drugs etc in there that we cant use any of that as fertiliser at risk of poisoning the land. yet agriculture really needs to become a closed loop system that no longer needs to rely on minerals dug from the ground.

For as long as man has been around we have had population corrections every so often. It usually happens when we get close to the carrying capacity of earth. Corrections have taken many forms, wars, diseases, famine etc. The end result is the same, a reduction of population to a level that is sustainable. As technology increases that sustainable level also increases. The issue is the correction being a percentage also increases. a 10% reduction of 1 billion people is a lot less than 10% of 7 billion. It is not a question of if a correction is comming it is a question of when and how.

Ever watch the original Blade Runner.
AI
Climate change
Society gone very strange (woke)
Large corporations run the world

The guy that dreamed up the movie had a vision..

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
He’s right.

All desalination does is move the endpoint some.

Add to that what is the unintended consequence of mass desalination to the environment?

There is a carrying capacity. We can move it some with technology, but there is a finite amount.

Do we want to extinguish all other life on this planet just to allow more people? That’s the potential endgame with technology- we are able to utilize everything with 100% efficiency. Even then, there is a hard cap somewhere. It may be much larger than we currently think possible - think something like a Dyson Sphere or a ringworld out of SF, but even so, until we get off the planet, it’s the old one pasture concept.

The problem is that we are now getting to the point where we are planning on improved technology without actually knowing what the improvement will be.

Maybe right now that's all it does. Hence, the value of technology. I have no doubt that intensive efforts to solve the problems associated with desalination would greatly increase the chances of solving the problem of freshwater being finite.

WATER is finte. Salt has nothing to do with it. Desalination “might” stave off the endpoint. Where do you store the salt?

quote:

Originally posted by MtElkHunter:
For as long as man has been around we have had population corrections every so often. It usually happens when we get close to the carrying capacity of earth. Corrections have taken many forms, wars, diseases, famine etc. The end result is the same, a reduction of population to a level that is sustainable. As technology increases that sustainable level also increases. The issue is the correction being a percentage also increases. a 10% reduction of 1 billion people is a lot less than 10% of 7 billion. It is not a question of if a correction is comming it is a question of when and how.

The general concept of the above is correct. I am not sure the earth has ever approached carrying capacity in man’s tenure however. Maybe in the Cretaceous Period.

But for sure…a correction will happen.