THE Earth in 2100 Thread (merged)

[Ibon]

Most radical advise everywhere within the forum come from personal projections from inside the authors heads. That´s hardly helpful.

Not only the radical ones...the reason any of us have hung on to this topic as long as we have has something to do with what you are stating here. And that is that the consequences of resource constraints in general represent a potential force to undermine the projections in all our heads whether they be political, economic, social, religious, etc.

I only remain active with this topic as long as I see the the way that peak oil, climate change and other resource constraints can act as catalysts toward a forced transformation........ because believe me, we are not capable of doing this willfully.........

[Corella]

Agreed Ibon, i quite share the same hope. Personally less optimistic according species distinction than yourself. And: i think issues might be even more delicate than physical resource constraints for itself. The grow of population came and have to come from biosphere. Physical resources are the means of harvesting it. This potentially boosts discussed effects of physical resource shortages. Most discussions approaching this are about fertilizer and its production. But that view is much too short. Population is depending on the grade and efficiency to make use from biosphere. I think most people here know about this classic:

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1 ... 9029384067

[Corella]

Correction: "species extinction".

Below please find a nice paper with a good summery of Vitousek´s findings (page 622) (forum member Cephalotus gave that hint in the German forum). Further on the author tries to estimate a bit closer the possible bias which is a very nice example no one can see sharp pictures inside nebula balls unless just imaging it. And it might give a hint, that there are more perspectives than just oil-flow-charts...

http://www.vaclavsmil.com/wp-content/up ... 13-636.pdf