I found this programme interesting and entertaining, though like most green politics it glossed over the real issue. The fundamental problem is not pollution - pollution is merely a side effect of gross overpopulation. Unless humankind limits its growth, controlling pollution is doomed to failure since the goalposts are continually moving ever further away. Whilst controlling pollution is undoubtedly a major and necessary problem to solve, it is insignificant when measured against the issue of restricting the swarm of humanity. Given that most people view it as their basic human right to bear children, it is perhaps unsurprising that politicians conveniently ignore the real issue and wave their fists in righteous indignation at your bulging dustbin. So, perhaps we should be asking ourselves not how do we control pollution, but how do we control overpopulation when doing so will inevitably breach ethical, religious and cultural boundaries.
Sorry, but I couldn't disagree more This is a very outdated and very inaccurate viewpoint (they were shouting this back in the 1960s). Population is irrelevant except to the extent which it consumes and pollutes. A few years back I saw a WHO report which estimated the average American consumes approximately 1,600 times as much energy as the average Nepalese. I'm sure the gap has widened by now! What I'm saying is Nepal could have runaway population for decades - centuries even - and still not make as significant an environmental impact on the planet as a few selfish Americans or Europeans
The real risk to the planet is personal aspiration. It has been documented that the US global footprint etc. is unsustainable. If all Nepalese, plus the populations of all the countries where consumption is currently below US levels (i.e. just about everywhere) reached the same level of consumption, the planet would go into meltdown. The big challenge is to seek solutions to consumption and waste problems in the developing and industrial nations whilst seeking to reduce consumption and waste problems in US, Europe and Japan to more sustainable levels.
No need to apologise, disagreement is the essence of life. What you say is undoubtedly true. Population would be far less relevant if a simple, non-technological lifestyle was adopted. However this will never happen. Countries that once lived on an agrarian basis with individuals farming on a subsistence level are now becoming increasingly industrialised – and who can blame them. They simply want the comfortable lifestyle that people in the West have enjoyed. To suggest that they should hold back their technological ‘progress’ would be hypocrisy of the highest order. Yes, pollution control will alleviate the problems, but as you have already said, there are simply too many people for everyone to have our lifestyle. However, people will aspire to our lifestyle. It is inevitable. And on that basis I maintain that there are far too many people in the world for a modern, technological lifestyle to be sustainable irrespective of whatever pollution control measures you put in place.
Originally posted by Dissident_Mind: No need to apologise, disagreement is the essence of life. What you say is undoubtedly true. Population would be far less relevant if a simple, non-technological lifestyle was adopted. However this will never happen. Countries that once lived on an agrarian basis with individuals farming on a subsistence level are now becoming increasingly industrialised – and who can blame them. They simply want the comfortable lifestyle that people in the West have enjoyed. To suggest that they should hold back their technological ‘progress’ would be hypocrisy of the highest order. Yes, pollution control will alleviate the problems, but as you have already said, there are simply too many people for everyone to have our lifestyle. However, people will aspire to our lifestyle. It is inevitable. And on that basis I maintain that there are far too many people in the world for a modern, technological lifestyle to be sustainable irrespective of whatever pollution control measures you put in place.
Quite, it is natural for everyone to want the Western lifestyle, and who are we to deny them? Or, indeed, order them to stop having babies? That's the ultimate in hypocrisy, and why it's important for the big energy consumers and wasters to set an example by trying to minimise their impact and lead a more sustainable lifestyle. That is the challenge for our political leaders, our businesses and all of us as individuals to try and make a difference before it is too late
