"George.com" wrote in message
...
Charlie wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 22:32:06 +1300, "George.com"
wrote:
Apparently 40% of treated water in the US leaks from pipes & never
reaches
it destination. At present rate of repair it will take around 900 years
to
rectify the problem.
In China it seems 53% of rivers, 50% of lakes & 35% of aquifers are
polluted.
Wonderful stuff.
rob
All you state is true and thanks for the observations on Cuba. Your
water degradation parallels ours, though ours started sooner. Hell,
man, we aren't even supposed to eat the fish out of our rivers in my
part of the world, at least not more than one per week. Children
shouldn't eat any. Yeah, that sounds like healthy fish.
society may collapse in a screaming heap and very quickly our civilised
way
of life screeches to a abrupt halt. I am not sure what the days were like
on
Easter Island following the last tree being felled. It may have been that
way, it may have been a more gradual decline into a lower plain of living.
The latter is what I observed in Cuba, things didn't suddenly and
irreperably fall apart yet the deprivation the populace went through was
significant and real.
I suspect that if we continue as we are, or make piecemeal steps toward
trying to clean up our crap, the environmental constraints we will come up
against will mean society continues along but will face lean times and
tough
times. I may not expect total anarchy but it will get harder. Thats not
just
economy wise with things like rising unemployment, inflation, lower growth
etc. I also imagine things like infrastructure decay, shortages, maybe
rationing & social dislocation.
Cubas experience, whilst by no means absolutely prefiguritive displayed
all
of that. Decaying water, power, transport & housing infrastructure.
Shortages of oil, chemicals, food, basic household commodities &
transport.
Social dislocation did not occur so much perhaps as people moving large
distances as rather a generation growing up in leaner times than those
before (and I have to state that tentatively as this is only a snapshot
observation). The legitemacy of the system previous generations had
accepted, ie consent given by previous generations, because it gave them
security of life was not mirrored automatically by the younger
generations.
That said, if we unknowingly reached a tipping point, the environment may
simply spasm and stop working properly setting loose a plague of plagues
thereby causing massive chaos and casualty. The stuff of Hollywood or
nuclear winter type scenario. I presume Easter Island did not suddenly
become uninhabitable once the last tree was chopped but successive
generations may have had a little less than the ones before. Confitions
and
quality of life went down a little year by year. The eventual outcome foe
Easter Island was apparently internal strife and bloodshed. I am not
suggesting automatically that is the end result for us all. We may become
a
little wiser and learn to live within the means of what we have, live a
negotiated society where things are more rationed and planned. I can't see
the current helter skelter of our existence continuing on however. Maybe I
am better to say "Our Current Mode of Life is screwed".
rob
Some alternative must therefore be necessary if we are heading toward
rooting our current way of life. Permaculture sets out some ways I can
envisage occurring. I guess I see this as an alternative type of approach,
whether we have the mind to achievable it. From wikipedia:
At the heart of permaculture design and practice is a fundamental set of
'core values' or ethics. These 'ethics' are often summarised as;
Earthcare - recognising that the Earth is the source of all life (and is
possibly itself a living entity- see Gaia theory) and that we recognise and
respect that the Earth is our valuable home and we are a part of the Earth,
not apart from it.
Peoplecare - supporting and helping each other to change to ways of living
that are not harming ourselves or the planet, and to develop healthy
societies.
Fairshare (or placing limits on consumption) - ensuring that the Earth's
limited resources are utilised in ways that are equitable and wise.
And weblink permaculture 'map'
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...rmamandala.jpg
My vision of Cuba, before I went there, was of a developing country
permaculture. In many ways I guess it is when placed alongside the tests
outlined above.
There is an intense debate happening in NZ at present over housing
affordibility (becoming less and less affordible). Some 'experts' point ot
scarcity of land as fueling costs & advocate unlocking large amounts of land
on the fringes of our cities to drop the market on sections. All good and
fine we may think however I wonder about then people moving their way around
a city, to work, for leisure etc. Our cities do not have great public
transport as our population density is low.
An alternate view is for more intensive city living with compact housing and
multi dwelling sections built around transport hubs, thereby limiting urban
sprawl. If the density goes up the effective costs of per person public
transport goes the opposite way. There are limits however on land so costs
go up.
The former approach is essentially unlock a free market & let the market
decide. Problem is the market is premised on cheap oil and ability to travel
distance. The latter is premised more along pseudo-permaculture lines.
Problem there is cost pricing a section of the populace out of home
ownership. An area for government intervention & assistance maybe.
rob