What do we need if we are going make it

You must remember that famous line in Terminator 2 “Were not going to make it are we”. Here is an article by Daniel Terdiman to invoke us to think about what we are going to need in the future.

Link

Snip....

For me, I think the worldwide shortage of drinking water is the one that, if solved, could most benefit the planet. Because while water crises in countries like India and China are well-known, and while political battles between countries like Israel and Syria may in the end have more to do with water than ideology, there are less understood water problems everywhere, including here at home. In the American West, for example, there are several states sharing water from the Colorado River basin. Yet, even as places like Las Vegas use more and more, the supply is rapidly dwindling as an extended drought gets worse and worse.

It does make you think (and I did) but was a silly idea. You see, this is a question that really demands more than a cursory moment and that’s all I gave it.

Some time later….. I thought what is it we chew up more than anything else (I don't mean food although it’s high on the list) energy we need clean energy perhaps we need fusion to get us through. (I know it was mentioned by one of the responders.) Cheaper cleaner energy would allow us to produce – Umm well more food, and then we can have more of us.

What do ATS’ers think?

hey man

you need to be made aware of something.

www.ecoloblue.com

takes basic humidity, dehumidifies the air.. collects the water vapor.. and rigorously purifies it.

fresh pure drinking water.


-

I tell ya, cause I been thinkin bout tis all week!

Besides some sort of depopulation (roughly 80% gotta go), we need to accept a life without the outrageous luxury we dwell in here in the "west".

Get you ass into the local super-market and ask yourself;
is this really all neccessary? Do we really need all this to survive?
Do we need meat? Do we need 100 different brands of everything? Do we need to have exotic food from all over the world, in or out of season? Do we need all the crappy merchendise that literally drowns us? Do we need to go abroad every freakin holiday? Do we even need electricity 24 hrs/day? Do we really need to inhabit locations that are inhabitable without devices to make it so? Do we even need to absoultely have kids? If we have kids, do we really have to teach them to live in this kind of insane luxuary that we do?

Do we, really?

The answer is of course no, that that is a no-brainer.
Everyone is sooo conserned about the state of everything, but is anyone really prepared to step down from this golden throne of abundance? Not really likely, sad to say.
People just can't see action and consequence...

That is what we have to do. There is more than plenty for all of us in this world, but the fewer of us waste sooo much more. Terrible. Horrible. Disgusting.

Water actually isn't a permanent or major issue beyond the cost on the North American continent...

it might become a higher paid commodity but inevitably a pipeline will be built, even prior, drilling to the proper depths there is a veritable ocean under the south west and desalinization from West Coast and Baja will eventually have to be done...

But there is not even remotely given friendliness with Canada, Alaska and desalinization potential (particularly solar powered) an actual threatening issue in the Americas

as far as food we also surplus out 1/3 of the worlds food right now and vertical farms as a reality will take agriculture to 5 - 10x current production levels in due time

Half the continent is currently unpopulated

It really isn't all that bad...

Even in regards to pollution, engineered bacterias and nano machines in time will make big contributions when combined with new medical techniques to purge us as organisms and ability to regrow organs the threat will in time be vastly reduced

Problems aren't too serious really...

Fear is a terrible thing

Surely what we are talking about is a global survival (What do we need if we are going make it) not just North America. Its not just water it’s a number of issues see previous post by “Raud” there is something there for sure.

To the OP: I believe you are right about energy being our largest concern. We should be examining any and all energy-related possibilities. Unfortunately, we are not doing so. While we are beginning to use wind, solar, and nuclear power, we have thus far not found a substitute for fossil fuels in transportation. The possibilities are out there, but they do not assist the major economic forces now in control of the planet's energy.

reply to post by Raud

is this really all neccessary? Do we really need all this to survive?

To survive, not really. But life is more than survival. Survival is huddling around a crude fire, hoping you have found a sufficient place to hide for the night so something bigger doesn't eat you before morning. Survival is trying to find food to curb your hunger while battling a disease and a high fever. Survival, in essence, is not something I would look forward to, and I'd be willing to bet, neither would you.

Do we need meat?

Considering the recent discoveries in brain physiology that appear to indicate meat protein is needed for mental development, and given that we, as a species, are capable of processing meat as food (meaning that we are supposed to eat meat), I would say yes.

Do we need 100 different brands of everything?

Do I need that? No. but if we only had one brand, we would have no competition in the economic market and there would then be a shortage due to high cost. So in that light, yes, we do.

Do we need to have exotic food from all over the world, in or out of season?

Actually, yes we do. As an example, citrus imports have pretty much wiped out rickets in the West. There are certain foods which provide certain nutrients that cannot be grown in certain areas. As we transport foods from one area to the next, we create more areas where people can live.

Do we need all the crappy merchendise that literally drowns us?

I'll give you this one; no one really needs a faux Persian rug. Some things we do 'need', however, like the labor saving and communication devices we have today (of which your computer is one). The question here would be how to determine what people need as opposed to what people want. It's not as cut and dried as one might think, and who exactly makes the determination? At present, it is made by the people themselves, through purchasing of items. Those purchased more at a higher price tend to become more common, while those not purchased at a profitable price cease to be produced at all.

Do we need to go abroad every freakin holiday?

I've never been abroad, so apparently I don't need to go. However, how many people also go abroad for other reasons, like to help bring technology to other nations, escape political/religious persecution, etc.? How exactly do we determine what is for pleasure and what is for a purpose? Who makes the decision?

Do we even need electricity 24 hrs/day?

I'd say so. Some people work during the night hours, and it is not a bad thing for them to have lights when they come home. Also, during the summer here even the nighttime can harbor 80°F temperatures, plenty high enough to spoil foods if not refrigerated. I am plenty thankful that I have a refrigerator and freezer that are capable of running 24 hours a day.

Also, there are areas where the temperature can get well below freezing during the night. Do you like the idea of waking up to a room that is 20°F in the morning? What about water supply in those conditions? Water freezes at 32°F, so there would be no water and no operable pipes left either after they burst under the pressure of freezing water. Yes, we definitely need electricity on a continuing basis.

Do we really need to inhabit locations that are inhabitable without devices to make it so?

We do if that is where we live.

Do we even need to absoultely have kids?

Yes, unless this is to be the last generation of humankind.

If we have kids, do we really have to teach them to live in this kind of insane luxuary that we do?

It is human nature to enjoy some amount of luxury. Should we deprive our children of things that will make their life longer or better, for some ideal that goes against our nature?

Sure, we can survive without some of the things you mentioned, but at what cost? Living in a cave somewhere because there is not enough lumber to build a decent house? Eating whatever food we can find scavenging? Plagued with disease because of nutritional deficiencies and dying at a much younger age? And with no children, no future, and no betterment of mankind.

You are advocating gross suffering and death on a massive scale, hopefully through ignorance as opposed to intent. My suggestion is that you go back to thinking some more, but this time actually examine those thoughts a bit more. There are over 6 billion people on this planet, and I doubt any one of them lives under the exact same situation you do.

TheRedneck

Originally posted by prevenge

hey man

you need to be made aware of something.

www.ecoloblue.com

takes basic humidity, dehumidifies the air.. collects the water vapor.. and rigorously purifies it.

fresh pure drinking water.


-

That will work if there is humidity but for water production alone its still to expensive. If you need cooling and water at the same time it kills two birds with one stone full marks for that.

reply to post by TheRedneck

To the OP: I believe you are right about energy being our largest concern. We should be examining any and all energy-related possibilities. Unfortunately, we are not doing so. While we are beginning to use wind, solar, and nuclear power, we have thus far not found a substitute for fossil fuels in transportation. The possibilities are out there, but they do not assist the major economic forces now in control of the planet's energy.

Hi Redneck, Thanks for your thoughts that was great. Electricity is I think the first to tackle it must be first environmentally friendly preferably zero footprint. Secondly it has to be cheap to produce and thirdly we need to make it a none profitable resource. Home solar or wind would fit that sure it won’t help everywhere but it would help. I guess there is already a start made on this.

reply to post by majestictwo

Transportation is the hardest area to solve, because it pretty much screams for energy densities that can only be supplied (according to today's technology) through chemical means. So in light of that, yeah, I agree that electrical production should be the first priority.

We have made wind and solar both front-runners in the race to supply the growing electrical need, but it appears both are destined to be supplemental. There's simply a limit on how much wind energy we can pull out of the planet before adversely affecting the wind patterns, and while solar is gaining in efficiency, it still is inefficient and at the mercy of day/night cycles and cloud cover. I personally believe nuclear technology is the most promising large-scale electrical production method, despite the problems with storing spent fuel. Research is ongoing in ways to either re-use or nullify the waste products, and other than that, they are actually pretty safe. If Sarah Palin is a bulldog with lipstick, the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) is a ticked off T-Rex with lipstick from eating bulldogs. I should know; my first job out of high school was in a nuke plant.

I don't think making it non-profit is a good idea, of course, because I am working on ways to produce electricity for a home independent of the electrical grid. I have this crazy love of actually eating food once in a while and staying warm during the winter. Any time you remove profit from the equation, you kill the incentive for people to work to accomplish the goals. Even those who do it out of interest in the technology will eventually be forced to move into other fields in order to survive. A lack of incentive is the last thing we need.

What we need is more incentive.

TheRedneck


[edit on 15-11-2008 by TheRedneck]

There is a post somewhere here of 'secret' underground water reservoirs that dot the globe, even under the Sudanese desert, which made the genocide there pointless.

There will never be water wars if people stop washing their cars, stop watering grass, and only use water for drinking, washing, vegetable/fruit/plant watering.

There's a lot of fear mongering out there when the basic answer is to use water on things that make sense and to pursue technology that extracts and filters water.

Technology could even create water by bonding certain atoms together.

Clean, unpolluted, Water means everything, so it should be top priority, not bombs and guns and missiles that does nothing for man, and total disclosure of secret military power technology is a must in a first step to ensuring that air, which carries pollutants to water, is clean.

The PTB must be forced to drastically cut military spending and devote it to technological pursuits that will clean the world of old toxic waste.

But it will never happen unless people start pounding the pavement calling for an end to the Order of Death.

reply to post by star in a jar

Technology could even create water by bonding certain atoms together.

We already do. Every time you drive a car, the gasoline is combusted into CO2 and H2O (water), along with a few impurities. That water can be seen as white steam exiting the exhaust pipe on a cold morning.

Water vapor exhausted into the air will eventually condense and fall as rain somewhere across the globe, which then collects into creeks, streams, rivers, and finally enters the main reservoir of the planet, the oceans.

So, considering this fact, and the fact that water is almost never destroyed, the question becomes one of potable water, not water in general. Nature has provided us with a very efficient filtration device that works for free: the crust of the planet itself. My water comes from a private well, and I therefore have no concerns over factory pollution. The ground filters the water for me, so I never run out.

TheRedneck

Yes there is plenty of water I agree and you are right potable water is the issue. Under developed countries are the worst off. If energy was cleaner and more abundant desalination would be a better option. We still come back to energy in the form of electricity. Transport energy is also an issue but if electricity was cleaner we could have electric cars – Umm I know batteries still a problem.

Perhaps we also need a global currency and a global metric system. That would help wouldn’t it?