Worst Environmental Problem? Overpopulation, Faculty Says
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Overpopulation is the world’s top environmental issue, followed closely by climate change and the need to develop renewable energy resources to replace fossil fuels, according to a survey of the faculty at the SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry (ESF).
Just in time for Earth Day (April 22) the faculty at the college, at which environmental issues are the sole focus, was asked to help prioritize the planet’s most pressing environmental problems.
Overpopulation came out on top, with several professors pointing out its ties to other problems that rank high on the list.
“Overpopulation is the only problem,” said Dr. Charles A. Hall, a systems ecologist. “If we had 100 million people on Earth — or better, 10 million — no others would be a problem.” (Current estimates put the planet’s population at more than six billion.)
Dr. Allan P. Drew, a forest ecologist, put it this way: “Overpopulation means that we are putting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than we should, just because more people are doing it and this is related to overconsumption by people in general, especially in the ‘developed’ world.”
“But, whether developed or developing,” said Dr. Susan Senecah, who teaches the history of the American environmental movement, “everyone is encouraged to ‘want’ and perceive that they ‘need’ to consume beyond the planet’s ability to provide.”
The ESF faculty pointed to climate change as the second most-pressing issue, with the need to develop renewable energy resources to replace fossil fuels coming in third.
“Experimenting with the earth’s climate and chemistry has great risks,” said Dr. Thomas E. Amidon, who invented a process for removing energy-rich sugars from wood and fermenting those sugars into ethanol. “This is a driver in climate change and loss of biodiversity and is a fundamental problem underlying our need to strive for sustainability.”
Rounding out the top 10 issues on the ESF list are overconsumption, the need for more sustainable practices worldwide, the growing need for energy conservation, the need for humans to see themselves as part of the global ecosystem, overall carbon dioxide emissions, the need to develop ways to produce consumer products from renewable resources, and dwindling fresh water resources.
###
Source: SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry
Thanks to NewsWise for this article.
As economy is based on population growth, many leaders just cannot come to term how to balance it. As always economy and ecology move in opposite direction. Money vs environment.
No matter what new technology we develop or how more energy efficient we make our processes it's still moot if we continue to increase our population.
Originally posted by Stevenson101:No matter what new technology we develop or how more energy efficient we make our processes it's still moot if we continue to increase our population.
It is natural that every species including we human try to propagate to colonise. The only different is we have technology and a measurement call wealth that is pushing mother nature to a break point that is showing thorough the cracks now. We place our emphasis on economy not on ecology despite all these "green" movements. All effort will be futile without proper human population control.
Originally posted by Chew Bakar:It is natural that every species including we human try to propagate to colonise. The only different is we have technology and a measurement call wealth that is pushing mother nature to a break point that is showing thorough the cracks now. We place our emphasis on economy not on ecology despite all these "green" movements. All effort will be futile without proper human population control.
i totally agree wif u, especially so the first sentence which hits the point. humans talk more and care more for themselves than any other beings
True... lolx...
Originally posted by Bangulzai:i totally agree wif u, especially so the first sentence which hits the point. humans talk more and care more for themselves than any other beings
Sad but true.
should create a super virus that wipes out 1/2 of the world's population, like how mother nature controls population of animals and plants under her care
Originally posted by Jianye:
should create a super virus that wipes out 1/2 of the world's population, like how mother nature controls population of animals and plants under her care
Like SARS or Ebolla but was contained.
Sars is not a good one nor ebola is....we need a transgenic virus with a mortality rate of 10% yet trnasmitted through fluids, be it rain, sea water.
anyone infected will metamorph into a zombie.....Urrggghhhh....
Originally posted by Jianye:
Sars is not a good one nor ebola is....we need a transgenic virus with a mortality rate of 10% yet trnasmitted through fluids, be it rain, sea water.
anyone infected will metamorph into a zombie.....Urrggghhhh....
Probably a cocktail virus that you are suggesting.
and are you willing to see your mother or father or sister or brother or son or daughter die from the virus?
Originally posted by the Bear:and are you willing to see your mother or father or sister or brother or son or daughter die from the virus?
I witnessed my family members death in WWII as a kid. Still a terrible feeling.
Originally posted by Chew Bakar:I witnessed my family members death in WWII as a kid. Still a terrible feeling.
and people consider "killer virus" with the kind of flippant nonchalance, it scares me.. because of this => Eric Pianka advocates death of 95% of humankind.. and people applaud him
Originally posted by the Bear:and people consider "killer virus" with the kind of flippant nonchalance, it scares me.. because of this => Eric Pianka advocates death of 95% of humankind.. and people applaud him
These are nutcases not much different to mass murderers of the wars. Reduce population yes but with birth control.
we need war..
Originally posted by youyayu:we need war..
Not again.
Originally posted by Chew Bakar:These are nutcases not much different to mass murderers of the wars. Reduce population yes but with birth control.
Got to tell that to those "To Be Married" couples.
But me wonders will they bother......
Originally posted by youyayu:we need war..
Both World Wars didn't seem effective enough...... something bigger needed? =\
a war in our galaxy....mars versus earth
Originally posted by Jianye:a war in our galaxy....mars versus earth
You must be a galatic war fan.
http://geniuspregnancy.com/news/american-woman-has-14-ivf-children.html
Women like this needs to be sterlized.
Originally posted by Stevenson101:http://geniuspregnancy.com/news/american-woman-has-14-ivf-children.html
Women like this needs to be sterlized.
nah.. i think women like this need to be in singapore
Originally posted by youyayu:nah.. i think women like this need to be in singapore
Ugh i don't relish that thought.
Last thing we need is her stupid genes mixing up the genepool
Originally posted by youyayu:nah.. i think women like this need to be in singapore
why?
fricken octomom is a disgrace to humanity