Earth on brink of environment disaster

[GoFlyKiteNow]

"96 months left" before it may be too late.

Earth on brink of environment disaster, Prince Charles warns

The Daily Telegraph
Published: July 09, 2009, 22:46

London: Nature, the world's biggest bank, could fail, the Prince of Wales has said in an apocalyptic warning that Earth is on the brink of environmental disaster.

Giving this year's Richard Dimbleby Lecture on BBC Television, the Prince said the next generation would face a "living hell" if governments did not urgently tackle climate change and stop plundering the planet's resources.

"In failing the Earth, we are failing humanity," the Prince said, drawing parallels with the global financial crisis. "Just as our banking sector is struggling with its debts ... so nature's life-support systems are failing to cope with the debts we have built up there too.

"If we don't face up to this, then nature, the biggest bank of all, could go bust. And no amount of quantitative easing will revive it."

He highlighted that the dual challenge of an economic system with "enormous shortcomings, and an environmental crisis of climate change" threatened to "engulf us all".

"We need urgently to look deeply into ourselves and at the way we perceive the world and our relationship with it.

"If only because, surely, we all want to bequeath to our children and our grandchildren something other than the living hell of the nightmare that for so many of us now looms on the horizon," he added.

The Prince re-emphasised the urgent need for action, saying there were "96 months left" before it may be too late to reverse the impact of climate change.

 

[Leegimeremover]

Big deal. As long those who suffer most are not in my back yard. Do you think any first world nation really cares? Who actually consumes most of the products that generate the most pollution? Do you think these countries like China and India actually consume the products they produce that generate super pollution? The ones to suffer are them not OECDs. Produce highly polluting solar cells in China to gain a little bit of shortlived clean energy that has a conversion rate between 11-14% at best for OECDs and they have a shelf life of 20 years and less.

Tell OECD to stop consuming they cowbecowbu. Standard colonialism. Export the ugly stuff, enjoy the good stuff and tell other people about the poop they shit in other people's backyard. You wanna save the Earth? I give you the ultimate solution. Stop industrialization for 5 years. Got balls? OECD first to say no. China and India makes no difference.

 

[Leongsam]

I've never heard such rubbish in all my life!

 

[Frankiestine]

Why the Prince of Wales suddenly become a soothsayer? Can predict something catastrophic in the next 96 months...

 

[cowbehcowbu]

"96 months left" before it may be too late.

Earth on brink of environment disaster, Prince Charles warns

The Daily Telegraph
Published: July 09, 2009, 22:46

London: Nature, the world's biggest bank, could fail, the Prince of Wales has said in an apocalyptic warning that Earth is on the brink of environmental disaster.

Giving this year's Richard Dimbleby Lecture on BBC Television, the Prince said the next generation would face a "living hell" if governments did not urgently tackle climate change and stop plundering the planet's resources.

"In failing the Earth, we are failing humanity," the Prince said, drawing parallels with the global financial crisis. "Just as our banking sector is struggling with its debts ... so nature's life-support systems are failing to cope with the debts we have built up there too.

"If we don't face up to this, then nature, the biggest bank of all, could go bust. And no amount of quantitative easing will revive it."

He highlighted that the dual challenge of an economic system with "enormous shortcomings, and an environmental crisis of climate change" threatened to "engulf us all".

"We need urgently to look deeply into ourselves and at the way we perceive the world and our relationship with it.

"If only because, surely, we all want to bequeath to our children and our grandchildren something other than the living hell of the nightmare that for so many of us now looms on the horizon," he added.

The Prince re-emphasised the urgent need for action, saying there were "96 months left" before it may be too late to reverse the impact of climate change.

tHE WESTERNERS HAD RELEASE 90% OF THE CARBON INTO THE ATMOSPHERE FOR THE LAST 200 YEARS...NOW THEY CALLED FOR GREEN EARTG..THE WEST SHOULD BEAR 90% OF THE COST TO RESTORE THE EARTH.........THAT IS FAIRNESS..........
PEOPLE IN AFRICA CONTINENT DONT EVEN CONTRIBUTE A FEW % OF THE CARBON EMISSION..IS IT FAIR TO ASK THEN TO CUT DOWN USAGE IN EQUAL PROPOTION AS THE WEST......AGAIN..WHITE MAN HYPROCRICY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[ScarFace]

The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

Authoritative new study sets out a grim vision of shortages and violence – but amid all the gloom, there is some hope too.

By Jonathan Owen, Sunday, 12 July 2009

An effort on the scale of the Apollo mission that sent men to the Moon is needed if humanity is to have a fighting chance of surviving the ravages of climate change. The stakes are high, as, without sustainable growth, "billions of people will be condemned to poverty and much of civilisation will collapse".

This is the stark warning from the biggest single report to look at the future of the planet – obtained by The Independent on Sunday ahead of its official publication next month. Backed by a diverse range of leading organisations such as Unesco, the World Bank, the US army and the Rockefeller Foundation, the 2009 State of the Future report runs to 6,700 pages and draws on contributions from 2,700 experts around the globe. Its findings are described by Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General of the UN, as providing "invaluable insights into the future for the United Nations, its member states, and civil society".

The impact of the global recession is a key theme, with researchers warning that global clean energy, food availability, poverty and the growth of democracy around the world are at "risk of getting worse due to the recession". The report adds: "Too many greedy and deceitful decisions led to a world recession and demonstrated the international interdependence of economics and ethics."....

 

[Leegimeremover]

The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

Authoritative new study sets out a grim vision of shortages and violence – but amid all the gloom, there is some hope too.

By Jonathan Owen, Sunday, 12 July 2009

An effort on the scale of the Apollo mission that sent men to the Moon is needed if humanity is to have a fighting chance of surviving the ravages of climate change. The stakes are high, as, without sustainable growth, "billions of people will be condemned to poverty and much of civilisation will collapse".

The impact of the global recession is a key theme, with researchers warning that global clean energy, food availability, poverty and the growth of democracy around the world are at "risk of getting worse due to the recession". The report adds: "Too many greedy and deceitful decisions led to a world recession and demonstrated the international interdependence of economics and ethics."....

What do you mean will be condemned to poverty. They already are and will always be. If they become rich, it mean OECD becomes poor.

 

[boundThunter]

It is their civilisation that Charlie was implying.

Is he going to ban the Africans from using fridges and watching colour TV's ?

 

[longbow]

Number 1 cause of destruction of env (not just talking about carbon emissions but pollution of water, deforestation the whole ball of wax) is over population.

In poor countries with no or little population control you see blatant destruction of env. Forests are cut down for firewood, water is polluted by non existent sewerage treatment. Just think of Easter Island, except that because the land mass is larger it takes a longer time.

I agree that advanced countries are responsible for a large % of global warming. But what would other forms of destruction of env?

 

[Leegimeremover]

Number 1 cause of destruction of env (not just talking about carbon emissions but pollution of water, deforestation the whole ball of wax) is over population.

In poor countries with no or little population control you see blatant destruction of env. Forests are cut down for firewood, water is polluted by non existent sewerage treatment. Just think of Easter Island, except that because the land mass is larger it takes a longer time.

I agree that advanced countries are responsible for a large % of global warming. But what would other forms of destruction of env?

Industrialization is the key factor to industrialization. Malthus check keeps things in place for over population. Mindless industrialization may lead to destruction of mankind

 

[scoobyhoo]

fxxk the whites, and I shall fxxk one white gal this friday.

 

[longbow]

It is because of overpopulation (not talking about running out of food here) that forces us humans to change our way of lives. We need to farm our land more intensively using more fertilizer and pesticides, clear more land for farming, build more cars and trucks and ships to transport the goods, mine for more minerals, extract more coal.

It is not mindless industrialization. You added another billion people on earth and just see how many factories and farms you need just to feed, cloth, house and move them about.

People are just looking at green house gasses but there is degradation of env everywhere.

However when you talk about pop control you meet opposition from many religious groups.

Industrialization is the key factor to industrialization. Malthus check keeps things in place for over population. Mindless industrialization may lead to destruction of mankind

 

[Leegimeremover]

It is because of overpopulation (not talking about running out of food here) that forces us humans to change our way of lives. We need to farm our land more intensively using more fertilizer and pesticides, clear more land for farming, build more cars and trucks and ships to transport the goods, mine for more minerals, extract more coal.

It is not mindless industrialization. You added another billion people on earth and just see how many factories and farms you need just to feed, cloth, house and move them about.

People are just looking at green house gasses but there is degradation of env everywhere.

However when you talk about pop control you meet opposition from many religious groups.

If the world never industrialized, overpopulation will never occur. The historical statistics suggest this if you plot the variables. You take away industrialization from the developing world, they will not grow like crazy. Industrialization is mindless because if you look at how much resources we need to achieve that so called level of affluence at the expense of the natural sinks that we destroy. There is enough food to feed the world population but distribution is a bitch and it is also intentional done and controlled that way. Greenhouse gases is good to look at for geopolitical and geoeconomic reasons.

 

[longbow]

Well then it is a chicken or egg questions. What came first?

When we were hunter and gathered we could not afford a large pop because food source was uncertain. With agriculture there was more efficiency. It took less effort/calories to products x calories of food. So we could support a large population

Note that population growth is negative or slow in industrialized countries while pop growth is high in non-industrialized countries. Note that output of industrialized countries often goes to other industrialized countries because they are the once with the $$$. Look at the poor farmers in india and vietnam - many are still living in pre industrial existence with use of draught animals for agriculture.

 

[Leegimeremover]

Well then it is a chicken or egg questions. What came first?

When we were hunter and gathered we could not afford a large pop because food source was uncertain. With agriculture there was more efficiency. It took less effort/calories to products x calories of food. So we could support a large population

Note that population growth is negative or slow in industrialized countries while pop growth is high in non-industrialized countries. Note that output of industrialized countries often goes to other industrialized countries because they are the once with the $$$. Look at the poor farmers in india and vietnam - many are still living in pre industrial existence with use of draught animals for agriculture.

Basically, industrialized countries are supporting the non-industrialized countries in their current ability to maintain a high population growth. Non-industrialized countries is not an accurate term because most of them today are industrializing and have quite significant amounts of industrializing though not to the state which they believe will bring them affluence. Without it, their population could have grown so much without the Malthus check. Take out the industries in India and Vietnam, they will not be growing as back as they are now. Energy use and the access to it governs population growth significantly. Industrialization allows for more effective energy use and leveraging. Burning crude oil by itself, just does not quite cut it as useful utilization of energy. Humans are but useless 100W (1/7 hp) machines by themselves, but great when they learn how to harness and leverage energy.

Well, industrialization can bring affluence and affluence brings about selfish behavior and the desire to enjoy more for oneself. Others may call it another strategy in survival by having less of supposed better quality offspring. Whichever the flavor, you like.

 

[SamuelStalin]

Dumb and irrelevant as hell.

The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

Authoritative new study sets out a grim vision of shortages and violence – but amid all the gloom, there is some hope too.

By Jonathan Owen, Sunday, 12 July 2009

An effort on the scale of the Apollo mission that sent men to the Moon is needed if humanity is to have a fighting chance of surviving the ravages of climate change. The stakes are high, as, without sustainable growth, "billions of people will be condemned to poverty and much of civilisation will collapse".

This is the stark warning from the biggest single report to look at the future of the planet – obtained by The Independent on Sunday ahead of its official publication next month. Backed by a diverse range of leading organisations such as Unesco, the World Bank, the US army and the Rockefeller Foundation, the 2009 State of the Future report runs to 6,700 pages and draws on contributions from 2,700 experts around the globe. Its findings are described by Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General of the UN, as providing "invaluable insights into the future for the United Nations, its member states, and civil society".

The impact of the global recession is a key theme, with researchers warning that global clean energy, food availability, poverty and the growth of democracy around the world are at "risk of getting worse due to the recession". The report adds: "Too many greedy and deceitful decisions led to a world recession and demonstrated the international interdependence of economics and ethics."....

 

[SamuelStalin]

the westerners had release 90% of the carbon into the atmosphere for the last 200 years...now they called for green eartg..the west should bear 90% of the cost to restore the earth.........that is fairness..........
People in africa continent dont even contribute a few % of the carbon emission..is it fair to ask then to cut down usage in equal propotion as the west......again..white man hyprocricy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

exactly dude.

 

[qwerty]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3C9CH3q9PLI&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3C9CH3q9PLI&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

[Leegimeremover]

8 more years of partying and merrymaking, great! Since 8 years is a long time and you could dead before that, party on! The world was around before Man and the world will be around even after Man! Party on!

 

[tonychat]

The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

Authoritative new study sets out a grim vision of shortages and violence – but amid all the gloom, there is some hope too.

By Jonathan Owen, Sunday, 12 July 2009

An effort on the scale of the Apollo mission that sent men to the Moon is needed if humanity is to have a fighting chance of surviving the ravages of climate change. The stakes are high, as, without sustainable growth, "billions of people will be condemned to poverty and much of civilisation will collapse".

This is the stark warning from the biggest single report to look at the future of the planet – obtained by The Independent on Sunday ahead of its official publication next month. Backed by a diverse range of leading organisations such as Unesco, the World Bank, the US army and the Rockefeller Foundation, the 2009 State of the Future report runs to 6,700 pages and draws on contributions from 2,700 experts around the globe. Its findings are described by Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General of the UN, as providing "invaluable insights into the future for the United Nations, its member states, and civil society".

The impact of the global recession is a key theme, with researchers warning that global clean energy, food availability, poverty and the growth of democracy around the world are at "risk of getting worse due to the recession". The report adds: "Too many greedy and deceitful decisions led to a world recession and demonstrated the international interdependence of economics and ethics."....

Go to the moon also no use, in the end those losers also kill the moon. The way to solve the crisis is to change the way human treats its environment, it is the human that is the problem, not the env.

Same as those poor pple who struck lottery and have millions and a year later lose all the money. If a person know how to handle money, a little amount will grow a lot , no need a lottery.

It is the person that need to change not the environment