MonteQuest wrote:davep wrote:Whether we want to sustain the world's population with such techno-fixes is another question. But if those fixes are genuinely sustainable, then we can say that the carrying capacity of the earth is higher than it would be without them.
According to the leading pherologists, the earth's carrying capacity is about 2 to 3 billion people using sustainable systems.
Techno-fixes help sustain overshoot.
Using wood fires would have been seen as a techno-fix at one point in human history. Pray tell why other sustainable yet non-implemented energy sources would be considered techno-fixes yet wood wouldn't? Surely any methodology where allowability is based upon whether a sustainable solution has already been implemented or not is flawed?