ie8 fix

Lovelock: the final warning

By | March 13, 2009, 2:45pm PDT

James Lovelock brought forth the biological concept of Gaia three decades ago. Now at age 90 he has published what we may take as his final warning.

The average global temps may rise as much as six degrees Celsius.

The earth is carrying seven times as many humans as it can sustain. [Okay, let's number off, one...two.... And some readers recently thought I was a pessimist for mentioning overpopulation.]

The current projection curves of gradually rising global temps are wrong, expect a sudden and catastrophic flip of as much as five degrees hotter.

The remnants of humanity will end up clinging to geographical lifeboats in northern reaches of the northern hemisphere.

Yet he has some suggestions for alleviating the warming: immediately begin converting to nuclear power, then gradually to thermal solar energy. Huge oceanic engineering projects to use algae to gobble up the CO2 collecting in our atmosphere.

You can order his new book, VANISHING FACE OF GAIA. Here you can find a left-wing review. A right-wing review here. Here’s a review in The New Scientist.

Here are some of the heated discussions of the global warming debate as spurred by Lovelock’s new book.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Disclosure

Harry Fuller

http://blogs.zdnet.com/green/?page_id=2

Biography

Harry Fuller

Harry Fuller is a media veteran, having spent decades in TV news in the San Francisco Bay Area. As GeneralManager of KPIX-TV (CBS) he founded one of the nation's first TV station websites in early 1995. He was News Direcor at TechTV when it was founded in 1998. In 2001 he moved to London to become Executive Producer for CNBC Europe. Four years later he returned to San Francisco as Executive Editor for CNET's news.com.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
32
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

It's obvious that you need to think about things more.
Letophoro 16th Mar 2009
Stupid ideas like carbon caps do nothing but cause pain by making everything more expensive and/or more scarce.


By making alternatives to being 'green' painful, you'll do nothing but make everything painful for everyone into the future. The intelligent solution is to make being 'green' less painful by making it less expensive and/or easier than not being 'green.'



The things I do that are 'green' aren't done to be 'green.' They are done to save money or because they are more convenient or both. Being 'green' is simply a byproduct of me wanting to save money, time, and effort.



I'll sum up and keep it simple: If you want people to be 'green' without suffering, make being 'green' cheaper than not being 'green.' Everybody wins if you can do that.
0 Votes
+ -
overpopulation?
voyager529 13th Mar 2009
Seriously now...overpopulated? on what grounds? Manhattan, L.A., New Dehli, Mexico City, Hong Kong? yes. Take a drive through Wyoming and see how long it takes you to pass a house. Wyoming is one of the least populated states in the USA, and it has nothing to do with the majority of it being inhospitable. What about Nebraska, Kansas, or any number of other places in the US alone in which it is quite possible to live 10 miles away from the nearest person. Wanna argue food and water supply? again, on what basis? how much food is thrown away every day? Do you believe that every square inch of land capable of growing crops has been used? Do you believe that the meat-bearing animals are endangered species?

Do we need to take care of our environment? sure we do! Do we need to get off fossil fuels? absolutely! I'll be the first person to agree with anyone who says that our dependency on oil is not sustainable. I believe that we need to start making fundamental changes in how we power and heat our homes, and the fuel sources we use for transportation and manufacturing. But to anyone who says that the world is overpopulated and that we need to reduce our population, I say, "Great! you first!"

Joey
0 Votes
+ -
How much food is thrown away?
Lerianis 13th Mar 2009
Some people have estimated (these are the enviroloonies) that 75-90% of our food is lost to spoilage or rot per year.

The consensus view thus far is taking into account the differing spoilage and throw away rates of vegetables/fruit, meat, etc. that we toss nearly 85% of our food in the U.S. that is not canned because of freezer burn or spoilage.

So, we are nowhere NEAR running out of food on this planet and also nowhere near 'overpopulated' judging by how much land on this planet (that is not good for farming but good for building homes on).

In fact, only 1/50th the land on this planet that is available for humans to live on is being used, suburban sprawl non-withstanding.
0 Votes
+ -
The entire population of the Earth...
kozmcrae 13th Mar 2009
could fit inside the Grand Canyon. Then you could circle the globe and come to believe there were no humans at all on the Planet. I think the maximum sustainable population is a debatable metric. That a smaller population would be beneficial is undeniable.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Lovelock: the final warning
timkaz@... 13th Mar 2009
believe it. Global warming is a cyclic event, has happened in the past and will happen in the future. Sea levels will rise many meters, and fall, and rise again until the end of time. Ice caps will melt, and re-freeze as they have done in the past. Look at Greenland it is now frozen, once it was lush. On a recent trip to the Pacific islands (coral islands) it was noted how wave action on the soft coral cliff faces had eroded huge holes all around the island at the same level. Looking up the cliff face, the same wave action could be seen at intervals all the way up the 100 foot high island wall. This indicated that the ocean has risen and fallen before.

re T J Wilbur
soc sci
0 Votes
+ -
about global warming. The evidence shows that MANY times in the past the polar ice caps have melted to the point of almost disappearing and have come back later.

People are pointing at NORMAL CYCLICAL EVENTS and saying "HUMANITY IS CAUSING THIS!", yelling at the top of their lungs and with BULLHORNS.

Level of noise does NOT make anything more true in this world. The FACTS are on the side of "Move along, nothing to worry about or see here!"
0 Votes
+ -
Of course you are not worried
InAction Man Updated - 14th Mar 2009
My dog isn't worried either, and he's a fine fellow and a respectable citizen.

Yo need a conscience to get worried. So no risk of you getting worried, ever.
why people think you're a pessimist.

You're a pessimist, that's why people think you're a pessimist. Your views on things are just logical extensions of your pessimism.
0 Votes
+ -
you ARE the pessimist
InAction Man 14th Mar 2009
A pessimist believes that there's nothing he can do to turn things around, we should be sitting ducks. An optimist believes that with action we can turn things around.

Yo believe that nothing can be done, you believe we are at the mercy of some higher will. YOU ARE a PESSIMIST, you are just a negative person.
0 Votes
+ -
Says the pessimist.
Letophoro 14th Mar 2009
A pessimist believes that there's nothing he can do to turn things around, we should be sitting ducks. An optimist believes that with action we can turn things around.

A pessimist believes that we are doomed and it's our fault unless we change. (You and Harry)

An optimist believes we are not doomed but wouldn't mind improving some things. (Me)
0 Votes
+ -
And what are you doing to "improve" things?
InAction Man Updated - 14th Mar 2009
Besides opposing those who are ready and willing to take action?
0 Votes
+ -
Nuclear is the cleanest source of power available at the moment for large-scale usage.

I burn wood pellets for heat. Carbon-neutral, but that's not why I do it.

I live 5 miles from my place of employment, and carpool with my wife that works about 1/2 mile from that location. Not that I do it for emissions, it just saves me money.


And what do you do?
you seem to feel it's OK to oppose those who want to see more people (much more) doing the same, or at least making an effort to do the same.

I find it hard to believe your actions match your words but, OK, I'll buy that.

And, trust me, I'm doing more than you do to offset my carbon footprint, I do plant trees and care for them, no kidding.
I want people to change in order to be less wasteful. I believe the best way to do that is to make it more convenient and cheaper to be 'green' than to not be 'green.'

You want to force people to change to fit your preconceived idea of how they ought to behave without regard to the pain involved. Things like carbon caps only make everything more expensive.
It's easy to talk about pain when others will have to endure it.
Stupid ideas like carbon caps do nothing but cause pain by making everything more expensive and/or more scarce.


By making alternatives to being 'green' painful, you'll do nothing but make everything painful for everyone into the future. The intelligent solution is to make being 'green' less painful by making it less expensive and/or easier than not being 'green.'



The things I do that are 'green' aren't done to be 'green.' They are done to save money or because they are more convenient or both. Being 'green' is simply a byproduct of me wanting to save money, time, and effort.



I'll sum up and keep it simple: If you want people to be 'green' without suffering, make being 'green' cheaper than not being 'green.' Everybody wins if you can do that.
0 Votes
+ -
Operative actuality
dpnewkirk 16th Mar 2009
Attacking a statement by characterizing its originator as optimist or pessimist--attacking a statement by characterizing its originator at *all*--is an example of ad hominem fallacy. To engage in ad hominem fallacy is to waste the time of your life.

Whether a reporter is an optimist or a pessimist is immaterial. All that matters is the operative actuality the reporter seeks to report. Characterizing a reporter as an optimist or a pessimist is to resort to thought-stopping cliche, and is the end of investigation. Only investigation and observation can bring one to the perception of operative actuality.

All that matters is operative actuality. Some minds are better at grokking it than others. See to it that yours is such a mind.
0 Votes
+ -
Who is trying to 'fear' the world into thinking that we are in trouble to get his enviro-loonie beliefs through the gate.

Frankly, there is no CO2 building up in our atmosphere. PERIOD. It's gotten to the point where I have to SEVERELY restrain myself from putting my fist through someone's face every time I hear that LIE about CO2. Something that is .005% of our atmosphere and has LESS of an effect on our climate than WATER VAPOR does is not something that we have to worry about!

I think that we should switch over to wind power, solar power, nuclear power, etc. as well.... but the fear-mongering that the enviroloonies are doing is NOT helping their case in the slightest way.
Add to that the Army Corp of Engineers estimation that all the SLIGHT, VERY SLIGHT warming of our world is coming from the sun..... and the global warming people's BS has been busted for good.

I was on the side of the environmentalists when I was in high school (i.e. when I hadn't researched this very well). After I researched this issue however, I found a BOATLOAD of problems with the arguments that the 'global warming' people were putting out there.

And need I remind people about "Global Cooling" 20 years ago? The fact is that humanity has NO idea what is normal for this planet, and doesn't know whether the world is going through a NATURAL cycle right now where it gets slightly warmer.
Plus there would be (admittedly little) room left over for roads. That would leave the entire rest of the world for cultivation.

Of course, the children would have to be with their parents, so many houses would be idle. Not to mention those couples that live together.


Imagine if the construction extended to two or even three stories. Man, there would be a lot of free space in Texas.
With families living together in a high rise together. Really, there is no reason that families should not live close to one another in reality. Without that, there is no 'safety net' for people if they get into trouble and things like the shootings down in Alabama happen.

I'm expecting that by 2200 we will all be living in high rise housing, with a floor belonging to a family unit of 10-20 people, all cousins, sisters, brothers, etc.
outside big cities, watching the high rises... from a distance.
0 Votes
+ -
Have you been messing with crack?
InAction Man Updated - 14th Mar 2009
Give the crack pipe some rest and take a look at reality.

Even if you don't care about the future or are unwilling to act, pleeeease don't sabotage the efforts of those who care and are willing to take action.

Thank you!
0 Votes
+ -
Say, did you notice
Hallowed are the Ori 14th Mar 2009
...that the ice caps on Mars are melting?

Must be all those carbon spewing humans on the red planet... oh... wait.
0 Votes
+ -
And the Sun revolves around the Earth
InAction Man Updated - 14th Mar 2009
or we would all be dizzy by now, living on a giant merry go round.
0 Votes
+ -
I don't even know what that is supposed to mean...
Hallowed are the Ori 14th Mar 2009
nt
0 Votes
+ -
It means the same as comment 4.3
InAction Man 14th Mar 2009
.
0 Votes
+ -
Ok, you're either a troll, or you're insane.
Hallowed are the Ori 14th Mar 2009
I'm not sure which, and to be honest, I don't really care. I won't waste anymore time on you.
A note to all those laughable pessimists who post here insisting that we should be sitting ducks waiting for our fate to fall on our heads.

The author of the article believes he can make people change their minds an start acting, NOW.

He is an optimist because he still believes that people's actions can still make a difference. If he didn't he would have already quit.

0 Votes
+ -
RE: Lovelock: the final warning
BetaVirus 14th Mar 2009
Global warming, Bush bashing, Obama loving ... why is this site such a liberal left wing loon outlet?
0 Votes
+ -
Bush loving, Obama hating, denialism
InAction Man 14th Mar 2009
why is this site allowing comments by such right wing reactionary stupid people?

Forgive the redundancy, using the word "stupid" was completely unnecessary but the phrase looks better with it.
0 Votes
+ -
Sounds like extremism to me.
CobraA1 14th Mar 2009
Okay, we may have some global warming - but I seriously doubt it'll be a huge catastrophe like they claim.

"The earth is carrying seven times as many humans as it can sustain."

If the Earth can't sustain them, then how are they still alive? Magic?

This is pretty much environmental extremism.
0 Votes
+ -
Some????
InAction Man Updated - 14th Mar 2009
You haven't been paying attention have you?

The world doesn't end in your backyard. Take a peek, see what is happening in the world!
0 Votes
+ -
Not much.
CobraA1 14th Mar 2009
Not much from what I can tell, other than a financial crises - but that's economic, not environmental.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix