Is Australia screwed?

[Ziggurat]

Can't afford to fix CO2 though, that would be way too expensive.

Well, rather obviously, yes. It would take more than the entire GDP of Australia to make any real dent in global CO₂ output. You think China or India are willing to cut back on economic growth to help prevent droughts in Australia, out of the goodness of their hearts? You think that would even be the right decision, on humanitarian grounds, given the abject poverty that still exists in both countries?

 

[Ziggurat]

Traditional; you can make a good case that Australia helped cause Japan to go fascist leading up to WW2 by the conduct of the Australian PM at the Versailles Peace Conference at the end of WW1, blocking anti-racist resolutions.

Yeah, because resolutions by international bureaucracies have such a great history of preventing racism.

 

[a_unique_person]

Well, rather obviously, yes. It would take more than the entire GDP of Australia to make any real dent in global CO₂ output. You think China or India are willing to cut back on economic growth to help prevent droughts in Australia, out of the goodness of their hearts? You think that would even be the right decision, on humanitarian grounds, given the abject poverty that still exists in both countries?

False dichotomy.

 

[a_unique_person]

Well, rather obviously, yes. It would take more than the entire GDP of Australia to make any real dent in global CO₂ output. You think China or India are willing to cut back on economic growth to help prevent droughts in Australia, out of the goodness of their hearts? You think that would even be the right decision, on humanitarian grounds, given the abject poverty that still exists in both countries?

LARGE sections of rural Australia are facing economic ruin and consumers have been warned of soaring prices for basic food items unless drought-relieving rain arrives within weeks.
In the most chilling assessment yet of the water crisis, Prime Minister John Howard yesterday said he had received a report warning of an "unprecedentedly dangerous" situation in the Murray-Darling Basin — the national agricultural "food bowl" that spans four states.
Mr Howard said that unless there was "heavy rain" in the next six to eight weeks, there would be no water allocations for irrigation in the basin, which accounts for 71 per cent of Australia's irrigated crops and 41 per cent of the nation's agricultural produce overall.
And economists have warned that continued drought across the basin now threatens to rip a $36 billion hole in the national economy, as well as sending fruit and vegetable prices soaring.

It could be in our own interests to implement Kyoto. China is also experiencing massive droughts, that will be costing it a fortune in the long run as well. Not much use having modern factories if there is little water.

Australia was one of the few hold outs, that helped encourage the US to not sign up for Kyoto.

 

[a_unique_person]

China wondering about climate change, too.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world...s-of-dry-rivers/2007/04/20/1176697090825.html

The village of almost 3000 farmers overlooks downtown Chongqing, the centre of China's biggest municipality where 30 million people live alongside China's biggest river, the Yangtze.
Chongqing, an ancient port established in 1000BC, was part of Sichuan province until 1997. It was given self-governing municipal status to hasten development, part of China's ambitious "Go West" program to reduce the growing gap between its poor rural west and the prosperous eastern provinces.
But despite billions of yuan in investment from the downstream Three Gorges dam and Go West, Chongqing's worst drought in a century has left the Yangtze and its tributaries at record lows.
The drought is disrupting shipping, leaving millions of people and livestock without drinking water and costing more than $US1.1 billion ($A1.3 billion) in economic losses so far, strangling efforts to improve the lives of farmers such as Mr Chen and the 1.5 million people displaced by the building of the dam.
Mr Chen has heard of global warming, but he doesn't know whether that — or the gigantic dam — is to blame for the drought and rising temperatures. What he does know is that every year Chongqing, long dubbed one of China's three "furnaces" for its searing summers, is getting warmer.
Since the 1950s, Chongqing has had 16 summers with temperatures higher than 40 degrees for up to five days in a row. Last year, it had 20 days straight of 40 degrees-plus.

Like Australia, this part of China also has a hot climate. A similar reaction to temperature rise, drying out of the landscape and severe drought.

 

[SezMe]

I've read through this whole thread and not once has anyone (including me) mentioned the real problem: overpopulation. Has anyone (especially the political class) in Australia ever mentioned curtailing the population as part of the solution?

 

[SimonD]

I've read through this whole thread and not once has anyone (including me) mentioned the real problem: overpopulation. Has anyone (especially the political class) in Australia ever mentioned curtailing the population as part of the solution?

Some people would say that Australia is under populated. Jim Soorly (Ex-Brisbane Lord Mayor) talked about a population of 50 million. Personaly, I think that's totally out of the ball park.

It's not so much the population size about where everyone lives. 80% of the popualtion lives along a small strip along the eastern coast. The pop. des. is about 2 people per square KM

E.T.A - Didn't the Howard government stop the wind farms because it might (1-1000 chance) cause the death of an endangered bird?

 

[SimonD]

BTW - did I mention that John Howards wants us to "turn to God" and pray for rain?

 

[athon]

I don't think population is the problem at all. At about 20 million, we can supply all resources (and some) apart from water. The reason for our experiencing problems with water shortage is chiefly that we think we're still living in Europe.

Our agricultural industry, such as growing cotton, depends on large amounts of water. Hell, most Aussies dream of lush gardens with lawns and orchids, and of washing their car each weekend, and hosing down their concrete...

We do stupid things like use drinking water to flush our toilets and hose our lawns. And avoid recycling water because the idea sounds icky.

We're no suffering a water shortage; we're suffering a cultural crisis. Once people learn that we can't use water like the rest of the world can we'll be sorted.

Athon

 

[athon]

BTW - did I mention that John Howards wants us to "turn to God" and pray for rain?

I wonder what goes through people's minds when they think of such things. That God we'll think 'Since you asked so nicely...sure! Here you go!'



Athon

 

[SimonD]

I wonder what goes through people's minds when they think of such things. That God we'll think 'Since you asked so nicely...sure! Here you go!'



Athon

Or why He would suddenly make it rain after we suffered for 10 years or so?

Either he heard the prayers from years past years and ignored them, or it's His grand plan that we suffer. Either way we're screwed. Though, I'm sure Howard is use to his way of thinking.

Howard: "I didn't know about [insert lastest scandal here]"

ME: "You don't know what is going on in your own department? Either you're not doing your job, or you are incompetent" Either way we get screwed (again)

E.T.A - My 500th post!

 

[SezMe]

Of course absolute population numbers don't tell the whole story. I would guess that if the global population was distributed around the global land mass, there would not be population problem. But who wants to live in Antartica? Or Greenland. Or, more to the point, how many people could live there?

It's the same with water. England's got plenty, the Gobi desert doesn't.

Smearing the population/resource problem globally will almost always mask the problem...and that is why the population/resource problem can be so easily dismissed.

The uneven population/resource distribution will always manifest locally before it becomes global. Which is exactly what is happening in Australia. The distribution of potable water/population in Bangladesh is another example. Air pollution/population in China is another.

I continue to belive that the fundamental problem is overpopulation. If the world population was, say, 2 billion, there would not be the problems we are now facing. Globally and locally.

 

[SimonD]

I don't think that overpopulation is the "cause all effect". We have enough resources in the world to give everyone a good living. What we don't have is the will to share the wealth. Am I going to drop my standards of living, so someone else on the othe side of the world can raise theirs? Not bloody likely. And there you have it.

 

[The Great Hairy One]

Athon is basically right here - too many people expecting to live like Europeans or Americans, where water is pretty much freely available. On top of that, lack of water "conservationism" planning - pretty much all the water which lands on Sydney, for example, just flows straight out into the bay.

Two main things need to happen here in Oz before things change:
1) People need to understand the actual cost of water, and
2) Politicians need to realise that votes are changing due to water availability.

Won't happen for another 3-6 years, once we really see some tight restrictions. Like bathing once a week.

Cheers,
TGHO

 

[a_unique_person]

I don't think population is the problem at all. At about 20 million, we can supply all resources (and some) apart from water. The reason for our experiencing problems with water shortage is chiefly that we think we're still living in Europe.

Our agricultural industry, such as growing cotton, depends on large amounts of water. Hell, most Aussies dream of lush gardens with lawns and orchids, and of washing their car each weekend, and hosing down their concrete...

We do stupid things like use drinking water to flush our toilets and hose our lawns. And avoid recycling water because the idea sounds icky.

We're no suffering a water shortage; we're suffering a cultural crisis. Once people learn that we can't use water like the rest of the world can we'll be sorted.

Athon

I think it's a bit of both. Expectations of water supply have had to be changed. However, stream inflows are down to record low levels as well.

 

[Gurdur]

Traditional; you can make a good case that Australia helped cause Japan to go fascist leading up to WW2 by the conduct of the Australian PM at the Versailles Peace Conference at the end of WW1, blocking anti-racist resolutions.

Yeah, because resolutions by international bureaucracies have such a great history of preventing racism.

Zig, out of interest, can you make your response to my post relevant in any way at all? Sorta like, you know, having some kind of connection? Any connection at all?

I realise you wanted to indulge in a kind of UN-bashing, but I'm so unimpressed. Hey, I'm talking about the Versailles Peace Conference, the behaviour of the Australian PM at it, and the effect on Japanese history. Now, just out of interest again, do you think you could make some kind of reply that would be all, ya know, like, tocuhing on the point at some juncture? Whether for or against, whether debating or supporting, but actually having some tiny real connection? Thanks in advance.

 

[Ziggurat]

It could be in our own interests to implement Kyoto.

That may well be, but if Australia's drought is caused by global warming (an unproven hypothesis, BTW), it is not within Australia's power to fix the problem. That was my point, and that is what you did not address.

Australia was one of the few hold outs, that helped encourage the US to not sign up for Kyoto.

Uh, no. Australia had pretty much nothing to do with the US's decision, and the decision wasn't even close (98-0 in the senate regarding the acceptability of Kyoto, IIRC). Nothing you could have done would have changed our minds.

 

[Ziggurat]

I continue to belive that the fundamental problem is overpopulation. If the world population was, say, 2 billion, there would not be the problems we are now facing. Globally and locally.

Got a plan for killing of 4 billion people?

There are serious problem with dropping global populations, even if only by attrition. Whose populations are you going to cut? How do you handle populations that insist upon growing despite your global project? And how fast a decrease do you think society can tolerate without massive social problems as a result? Welfare states seem to be the only ones which engage in self-extinction, but they are also susceptible to massive problems from a top-heavy age demographic due to the economic drag of retirees. And the usual solution (rely on heavy immigration) causes problems of its own.

If 2 billion people is really optimal, we're stuck with overpopulation for at least a few centuries, I suspect.

 

[athon]

Population can't be changed. However, what does need to be addressed in light of global populations is a new way of dealing with economies that don't serve to push for a pyramid structure of population size versus age. At some stage we need to deal with an inverted pyramid, and I don't see the sense in pushing the decision forward constantly to the next generation.

Athon

 

[a_unique_person]

That may well be, but if Australia's drought is caused by global warming (an unproven hypothesis, BTW), it is not within Australia's power to fix the problem. That was my point, and that is what you did not address.

When you have an drought that is the most severe recorded, and temperatures rising, it's that it's "unproven", but that it fits in so well with model projections that makes you worry. To just say that no one country can fix the problem is pointless. The corollary is that no country will ever do anything, because no-one will make the first move. Every one has to do their bit, in the end, and that's what's going to have to happen.