Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:42 pm Post subject: 6,000,000,000 die-off
Please enlighten me. I am confused.
Reading through many of the current forums on PO, depletion, loss of resource, etc., etc., I keep seeing reference to the massive (possibly long term) die-off of the human species. Some are suggesting a complete extinction of the species. Many are saying the die-off will be almost complete in many parts of the world. Some are suggesting the die-off will probably result in a world population of one billion, down from the current six billion plus.
Here is where I am confused.
I am guessing but I would suppose that probably four billion of the population now live at what we (in western terms) would describe as a subsistence level. These four billion are mostly dependent upon their own labor, ie., farming, for their livelihood. None of them have any motorized tools, electricity, or other "modern" conveniences.
I do acknowledge there will be an adjustment in the living standards in the western world because of the loss of the energy rich petroleum goods.
But why would the supposed die off include those four billion who have no real day to day dependence upon oil? Their biggest problem is the effect of droughts and storms. In those cases, yes, the use of petroleum does allow for relief to get to these people. But on a daily basis they have no access, let alone need, for oil.
So if the doomers are right and those of us who are dependent upon oil do die off, wouldn't the majority of the four billion who are not still be around. That does not sound like extinction to me.
Joined: Mar 07, 2007 Posts: 301 Location: Houston, TX
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:07 pm Post subject: Re: 6,000,000,000 die-off
The reason 4BN and possibly more people will die off because the cheap agricultural products which these poor people depend on will be gone due to higher energy prices. If oil is $1000/brl then ethanol is $30/gl so as a result one loaf of bread is 5 dollars and you are making $1/day, can you survive?
No, you can not. Most of these people will be from Africa and Russia. That is my opinion.
Last edited by misterno on Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:34 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 12487 Location: zombie horde wonderland
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:14 pm Post subject: Re: 6,000,000,000 die-off
ProudFossil wrote:
That does not sound like extinction to me.
Please explain.
I'm not convinced anyone is claiming human extinction, except possibly as a result of runaway global warming or asteroid collision, etc. Certainly not because of peak oil!
We've had endless debates on here about the sustainable human population. Some think it is as low as 1 billion, possibly even less. Nobody knows for sure. But it's extremely unlikely the Earth can sustain a population of 6 billion+ without plentiful fossil fuels.
Die off is not the same as extinction. Said it before, I'll say it again. Die off is not the same as extinction. _________________ No original ideas are contained in this post.
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:27 pm Post subject: Re: 6,000,000,000 die-off
Are you saying that only the wealthiest will survive? I'm speaking here more of nations than individuals. I think the prior post makes a good point. Many of these people are already living a hardscrabble, non-oil lifestyle. What does it matter to them if oil runs out? Do you really think those guys working with a hoe on their small farms are using petro-chemical fertilizers or are they using cattle poop?
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:31 pm Post subject: Re: 6,000,000,000 die-off
You may have too bucolic a view of the world's poorest, PF. A majority now live in (generally quite squalid) urban settings. Lots of international policies and pressures('globalization') helped "encourage" (or better "force") many small farmers to leave their land. Google images of the Lagos slums for a glimpse into what I'm taking about.
The urban poor depend, at the least, on food being trucked into the city, and as fuel prices for the trucks go up, so will food prices. Also, back on the farm, much of that urbanization has come about because of increased (fossil-fuel-based) mechanization and other forms of "efficiencies" on the farm, from hybrid seeds, to (fossil-fuel-based) fertilizers and pesticides ("Green Revolution" developments).
We won't even get into bio-fuel fiascos that now tend to link food prices directly with ever-rising fuel prices.
In general, I think you are right that in a way the poorest will have some "advantage" in a scarce-fossil-fuel world since many have now enjoyed its much advantage from the age of cheep ffs. But many are also in the most precarious position already, and any change, whether from worsening climate (note Myanmar...) or from increases in prices for their already barely subsistence food (note recent world-wide food-price riots), will spell rapid death.
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:41 pm Post subject: Re: 6,000,000,000 die-off
Yeah, this is something I've thought abot too. I also think the people that are dependant on driving thru McDonalds, the people who are on perscription meds daily, the people that can't walk down the street, let alone have ANY knowledge of growing their own food, composting, nutrition, sustainable living would die off first too. The meak not only shall inherit the earth, it's theirs already. And there are MANY more people that live daily close to and intertwined with the earth than live like us. Yes, true, some will die bc they won't be getting any/as many emergence staples that are recieved from OXFAM and international resources. But i agree that they're in much better shape than most fat diabetic SUV driving suburbanites. we'll be the first to go.
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:41 pm Post subject: Re: 6,000,000,000 die-off
dohboi wrote:
You may have too bucolic a view of the worlds poorest. A majority now live in (generally quite squalid) urban settings. Google images of the Lagos slums for a glimpse into what I'm taking about.
The urban poor depend, at the least, on food being trucked into the city, and as fuel prices for the trucks go up, so will food prices. Also, back on the farm, much of that urbanization has come about because of increased (fossil-fuel-based) mechanization and other forms of "efficiencies" on the farm, from hybrid seeds, to (fossil-fuel-based) fertilizers and pesticides ("Green Revolution" developments).
In general, I think you are right that in a way the poorest will have some "advantage" in a scarce-fossil-fuel world since many have now enjoyed its much advantage from the age of cheep ffs. But many are also in the most precarious position already, and any change, whether from worsening climate (note Myanmar...) or from increases in prices for their already barely subsistence food (note recent world-wide food-price riots), will spell rapid death.
Village irrigation pumps for crops and refrigerators for antibiotics and vaccines require diesel, kerosene, gas etc. That's why we have 6 billion people now. Ignorance was bliss. _________________ ree rah rip ram. sunofabitch godamn. hidey didey christ almighty. rah rah crap
Joined: Sep 01, 2005 Posts: 272 Location: New Hampshire USA
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:46 pm Post subject: Re: 6,000,000,000 die-off
The so called "green revolution" raised the carrying capacity beyond what traditional methods ever could. Oil, has allowed the population to swell to a amount that old fashioned farming cannot support. The 1 billion estimate is based on the old "cow and plow" method I would suppose.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:50 pm Post subject: Re: 6,000,000,000 die-off
hope_full wrote:
Do you really think those guys working with a hoe on their small farms are using petro-chemical fertilizers or are they using cattle poop?
It really depends. One of the big projects of the International Monetary Fund over the last 50 years has been to try to promote industrialized agriculture in developing countries. This has simultaneously worsened overpopulation and severely damaged the potential for subsistence agriculture in a lot of places. Drought and pest resistant heirloom crops have been replaced by mono-cultures aimed at maximizing output with fertilizers and pesticides. Subsistence farmers have been displaced to cities where they work in factories. I think the actual number of people who are at this point self-sufficient for all of their needs is minuscule and those people are under constant attack from governments and financial interests that demand they become dependent. The recent goings on in Haiti are a great example. Haitians certainly live a hard scrabble life without most of the "benefits" of oil, but a small increase in the cost of rice was all that it took to push many of them into starvation. _________________ "So while you sit and whistle Dixie with your money and your power.
I can hear the flowers a-growin in the rubble of the towers.
I hear leaders quit their lying
I hear babies quit their crying.
I hear soldiers quit their dying, one and all." - OCMS
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:52 pm Post subject: Re: 6,000,000,000 die-off
What the OP and Hope-ful both are missing is this . . .
The population of the world was stable at about 1 billion prior to fossil fuels.
The growth of the extra 5.5 billion did not just happen to coincide with FF discovery and use. The extra 5.5 billion were brought into existence because of the discovery and exploitation of FF.
Sure, peasants in China and India are living a primitive, basic lifestyle.
But the fact that they are living at all is because the rice they eat is fertilized, pesticized, and grown will FF.
Take away that FF input, and they no longer can afford rice.
This point is clear as day and indisputable.
Population growth has tracked FF use growth.
And it will continue to do so on the downside. _________________ Massive Human Dieoff must occur as a result of Peak Oil. Many more than half will die. It will occur everywhere, including where you live. If you fail to recognize this, then your odds of living move toward the "going to die" group.
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:54 pm Post subject: Re: 6,000,000,000 die-off
Now we are getting to the critical issues. PO is a result of use by the 1st world nations. The major impacts will be on 1st world or developed nations. To curtail demand, given human nature, controls must be placed on the developed nations. Either all people must be forced to live at a lower standard of living or the number of people must be reduced, at the higher standard of living, to stretch the useful life of fossil fuel.
I want to know who here will volunteer to be in one of the four following groups:
1. The group that lives without oil.
2. The group that drinks the kool aid.
3. The group that makes everybody live without oil and drink kool aid.
4. The group of subsistence survivors who didn’t do anything meaningful.
Let me know if you think there are other choices. _________________ HOLDING THE CENTER
Joined: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 12487 Location: zombie horde wonderland
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:57 pm Post subject: Re: 6,000,000,000 die-off
What do you mean by "meaningful" in example 4?
I don't personally expect to survive die off, myself. So, "none of the above because I'll already be dead" is my response, I guess... _________________ No original ideas are contained in this post.
All times are GMT - 6 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 62, 63, 64Next
Page 1 of 64
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
ree rah rip ram. sunofabitch godamn. hidey didey christ almighty. rah rah crap 
