Environment and housing

[willpeavy]

Right now I live in a small apartment in the downtown area of the most densely populated county in the state of Florida (which is one of the most populated states in the U.S.). It's dirty in the city, there's smog and the water is just dirty. I live a block away from Tampa Bay and you can't go swimming in that water, and you definitely don't want to drink it. A hundred years ago, the water in Tampa Bay was so clear you could see straight through to the bottom, but it's polluted and nasty now. That's what happens when you cram million and millions of people right on top of each other. It effs everything up. ... On the other hand, next week me and my family are moving way out to a small town in the country called Orange City. I can't wait to get there. The population is much sparser, so it's much cleaner. Look at the pictures of this park right down the street from where we'll be living - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Spring_State_Park . It's beatiful there. The water is clean, you can swim in it, and you can drink it. There are lots of trees and forests. ... You can live in a big house with a big yard out in the country and not screw up nature so bad because you don't have so many people polluting the area. So I think living where people are more sparse and people have a big house on a lot of property is a good thing. But when you start crowding people into a giant city, you get lots of smog and polluted water and it doesn't matter if the city is spread out like LA or stacked up like Manhatten - I don't think you'd want to go around drinking water from the East River.

[Odidnetne]

I don't even like going into NYC, let alone being exposed to the East River.

[andgbr]

It's families with 1 child in the US or Sweden that is the problem. The families of 1 obvoiusly are not contributing to overpopulation though. For this reason I believe that overpopulation is a small problem when it comes to global warming, although not neglectible.

 

I totally disagree. If there were a reasonable number ( 10-20 million or less? )of people on the earth, we could all live in giant houses with pools, drive SUVs, eat at McDonalds for every meal, run the air conditioning with the windows open etc. The impact on the environment would be marginal at most.

 

I don't disagree with your more practical ideas for cleaning up the environment, without exterminating most humans. I just think it is a sad chapter in human history when we will be relegated to tiny cubes in concrete cities.

 

Bah, why would you want to eat at McD's every meal (even though I know you're not advocating it)?

 

I think it is sad if we can't fix our problems to only let a person have such a small amount of space, because we've wasted most of our other space.

 

i think that what he was saying, is that we could do a lot of non-environmental, nasty things and we wouldn't have to worry about the environment.. if we had a much smaller population.. the impact would be proportional to our size.

[Guest]

I think there are alot more dirty people than you think...Americans produce the most but China is right behind us and India's growing economy is going to allowing them to creep up to third. Its not a small issue with a smaller percentage of people doing it. Europe is fairly green but as industrialized nations the US/China are terrible while poor countries believe they have little choice but to be dirty.

 

***As for the raw thing with the gas...I farted just as much when I was eating raw...didn't burp as much though

[9nines]

The single biggest problem we have when it comes to global warming is the belief that the govrnments will fix this problem. They won't, because they can't.

Have you ever asked yourself if people in Germany didn't see what was coming when they voted for Hitler in the 1930's? After the war started did they still not see?

Since we live in more open societies (information wise) today global warming is even more obvious today than was Hitlers plan in the 1930's. The consequences of global warming will probably be alot bigger than the negative impact Hitler had on the world and the solution is painfully clear.

Housing is just a part of the cultural mind set that needs to change, according to me.

 

I disagree. I think the most people say, yes there is a pollution problem but my pollution is so small compared to the world as a whole, it does not matter. Without government action to establish regulations and actively enforce them, I think the majority of people will simply continue to heavily consume and create much waste, while still wanting a clean environment, using the excuse, my trash does not really matter compared to everyone else's.

Edited December 22, 2006 by 9nines

[9nines]

On the original post, some famous economist (I forgot who) stated that the suburbs will likely go down in history, as the most inefficient allocation of resources, in the history of mankind, for the exact inefficiency (all the roads, cars, houses) that you mentioned.

[andgbr]

I think there are alot more dirty people than you think...Americans produce the most but China is right behind us and India's growing economy is going to allowing them to creep up to third. Its not a small issue with a smaller percentage of people doing it. Europe is fairly green but as industrialized nations the US/China are terrible while poor countries believe they have little choice but to be dirty.

 

***As for the raw thing with the gas...I farted just as much when I was eating raw...didn't burp as much though

 

it's a cleaner fart, that smells like avocado.. lol....

anyways, but if we all were vegan we would have a lot more food options, and more information about the vegan diet, a lot of people would try to avoid stuff that makes you fart.. or perhaps we could find another ''easier'' solution for that.. a invention of some kind.. isn't that a solution?

omnivores fart too, we've got to remember that.. that counts, too..

so if we were all vegan less living things would have to be alive to fart.

[offense74]

The single biggest problem we have when it comes to global warming is the belief that the govrnments will fix this problem. They won't, because they can't.

Have you ever asked yourself if people in Germany didn't see what was coming when they voted for Hitler in the 1930's? After the war started did they still not see?

Since we live in more open societies (information wise) today global warming is even more obvious today than was Hitlers plan in the 1930's. The consequences of global warming will probably be alot bigger than the negative impact Hitler had on the world and the solution is painfully clear.

Housing is just a part of the cultural mind set that needs to change, according to me.

 

I disagree. I think the most people say, yes there is a pollution problem but my pollution is so small compared to the world as a whole, it does not matter. With government action to establish regulations and actively enforce them, I think the majority of people will simply continue to heavily consume and create much waste, while still wanting a clean environment, using the excuse, my trash does not really matter compared to everyone else's.

Oh, yes, the excuses

Whenever you present an alternative way of living people start behaving and talking irrational. It's fun and sad at the same time. I see this in a lot of issues, one of them being about environmental issues.

The knowledge we have on this issue tells us that we need to change the way we live. Not to something better or worse, just different. Butas I said, when you ask people to change they start to defend their old habits by making irrational (emotional) arguments sound rational.

 

"God put us here as shepards so we can and should do whatever we want, except having sex because that is unnatural."

or, if you're basic view of yourself in the context doesn't work together with the proven fact that humans do contribute to global warming:

"The evidence of humans contributing to the increase in green house gases is weak. Just listen to this guy, we found him in a closet in Dick Cheneys house. He's a scientist and says that carbon dioxide is not really a problem. Don't be foolish and listen to the other 10.000 scientist that proclaims they have evidence..."

or parents who you would think want to spare their kids 100 million climate refugees and 10.000 extinct species:

"My kid needs to go to soccer practice 5 blocks from here so I need to pack them in my SUV."

 

The same thing happens when you tell people to go on a vegan diet.

 

The frustrating thing is that people who are aware of the new, better lifestyle keeps feeding the rest with rational arguments and keep getting these irrational responses. It's a miscommunication and it's frustrating.

[Guest]

If you think about it people that live in rural areas without running farms are more wasteful than the typical american suburbanites...many have driveways the length or longer than the suburban block I grew up on...also trash collectors must go much further out of the way to pick up trash from them instead of stopping every 50ft to get trash...same goes for mail curriers. People must also travel further to get groceries...the only reason why it doesn't seem as dirty is that there isn't a large percentage of the population living in rural areas anymore and the trees surrounding them keep the polution a bit more localized which also keeps pollution from suburbs hidden from them too...but if the planet were large enough for all of us to live like that we'd actually be producing more waste.

Back to the farting thing...I'd much rather our farts all smell like avacados or better yet GEORGIA PEACHES