Re: [asa] A Sustainable Future and Exponential growth

Anybody want to toast eternal progress?

As they say in stock trading, "no tree grows to the sky."

Phil

-----Original Message-----
From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. <dfsiemensjr@juno.com>
To: dopderbeck@gmail.com
Cc: wmdavid.wallace@gmail.com; asa@calvin.edu
Sent: Sat, 17 May 2008 11:38 pm
Subject: Re: [asa] A Sustainable Future and Exponential growth

Regarding progress in taking care of a larger population, I note that there is already a shortage of safe water in many parts of the world. They are treating sea water in the Near East, with the resultant increase in greenhouse gases. But there are additional problems like Myanmar at the present moment, and the area of the Chinese earthquake. A little disruption and many people have their supply of clean water disrupted. As to food production, a drought can reduce the food in large areas of Africa. On the other hand, I just saw a report that an area in the US is late getting the corn planted because the fields are too wet, with the consequence that the yield will be reduced even as demand increases. As an additional problem, there is talk of using corn stalks, straw and other crop residue to produce ethanol. But this reduces the humus in the soil, with a negative effect on fertility and conservation. I suspect that every optimistic prediction can be countered by a pessimistic
  report.

?

As for colonizing other planets, you can cook on Mercury and Venus, get crushed on any of the gas giants, but maybe get a purchase on Mars. There is a vanishing likelihood on some minor planets. Assuming that Mars can be made habitable, how do we transport billions of earthlings there? I recall an estimate that a trip to the nearest star in a possible time would require fueling a space ship with the mass of the earth. I don't think there is any hope of getting out of the solar system except in science fiction.

?

My guess for a solution to the population problem is more likely to be an epidemic. I note that we seem to be losing the battle against bacteria, which are more and more resistant to all antibiotics. Then there are zoonoses like AIDS and bird flu. Anybody want to toast eternal progress?

Dave (ASA)

?

On Sat, 17 May 2008 22:21:30 -0400 "David Opderbeck" <dopderbeck@gmail.com> writes:

Dave W. -- if the eschaton is delayed a billion years into the future, I doubt we'll have to worry about overcrowding the earth.? We'd have colonized other planets by then and we'd probably have learned how to upload our minds into computers.? I'm getting old and cranky though, so I don't think the Lord will tarry a billion years.

On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 6:11 PM, Dave Wallace <wmdavid.wallace@gmail.com> wrote:

David Opderbeck wrote:

Ken, it seems to me that the Smail article just rehashes the Malthusian fallacy that technology must remain static while population grows. ?For example, Smail says this: ?/"Clearly, assertions that the Earth might be able to support a population of 10 to 15 billion people for an indefinite period of time at a standard of living superior to the present are not only cruelly misleading but almost certainly false." / ?Why is this so clear and certain? ?Smail doesn't say. ?(Rhetorically, whenever someone uses the words "clearly" and "certainly" in the same sentence, it's likely that the actual evidence is neither clear nor certain).
It's quite possible that agricultural biotechnology will indeed enable us to feed 10 to 15 billion people indefinitely; it's also quite possible that communications technology will facilitate a global economy in which that many people; and it's also quite possible that new technology will substantially change the "peak energy" curve. ?The market demand for all this will continue to grow (with population growth), and market demand tends to drive technological progress. ?At the very least, it seems impossible to say what is "clear" or "certain" to be the case 50, 100 or 150 years from now technologically. ?Moreover, technological progress and diffusion tends to result in a reduction in average birth rates, as people move from traditional agricultural societies into more advanced technological ones.

David
I think your dismissal of population growth is too facile. ?Sure technology may enable us to feed 10 to 15 billion people on the earth but lets consider the scenario that the earths population continues to grow by a very modest amount of 1% a year and that the eschaton is delayed for a billion years into the future. ?I think it is clear that the earth could not sustain the population sometime during that period. ?Certainly companies can not grow their profit by 10% for an indefinite period, lots have tried and failed. ?In a physical world exponential growth or die off is not containable after suitable periods of time. ? If you disagree maybe you could give me 1 cent on the first square of a chess board, 2 on the 2nd, 4 on the 3rd, 8 on the 4th and so on.
Seriously if the return of Christ is delayed then Christians would need to consider how to control population either from a total die off or from an explosion. ?I suggest this is a topic worthy of consideration on this list.

Dave W

(I have changed my email address for this mailing list as I was regularly missing email from David O, Rich, PVM... but others were coming through just fine. ?My old email addresses work fine as far as I can tell for other mail, just not for the asa list, certainly Rich can through fine when he sent me mail offlist. ?The support staff at hotmail ignore pleas for help and do not even answer my emails. ?For some reason now I do not seem to get ?a copy of posts that I make but I can see them on the archieve so I assume they are getting through.)

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

-- 
David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology 
?
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.