Will trawlers disappear?

[Woodland Hills]

A car, most likely. Some transportation methods like boats just don't scale down well. The stuff moved vs fuel consumed relationship gets worse as you try to move smaller amounts of stuff.

This is true. A motor scooter is probably the most efficient way to move one person and minimal gear.

 

[sdowney717]

Trawlers would only stop being used, not disappear, say if our government, whom you elect, decides to tax fuel oil and gasoline out of reach to ridiculous amounts in order to make some political points with the people who vote them into office to stop global warming, as if it could be stopped.

Your future is in your own hands, I speak corporately. And I am not impressed with millennial generations politics, which is mostly the opposite of mine, but they are here now with more clout and getting older enough to affect things for the worse, to me progressive means progressively worse. Oil price, the price you pay for energy, is mostly politics.

 

[bligh]

Trend in transportation is away from petrol and diesel.

I beg to differ. A few points;


Electric cars that are charged by fossil fuel power plants are still fossil fuel powered vehicles.



(most?) Toyota Prius still have gasoline engines and are not electric vehicles.




There is no trend 'away' from fossil fuels, especially commercially;



Electric vehicle sales dropped in both China and the US from 2018 to to 2019.



US electric vehicle sales rely upon government subsidies as incentive to purchase. How many non subsidized electric vehicle sales were there in the United States? Close to none I presume.


Nation wide, electric vehicles make up .32% of the vehicle population. For the most part (99.68%), fossil fuel cars are preferred over electric vehicles.


Hip, Your diesel trawler is safe from extinction. Also we already have an alternative to a trawler , and you own one already, its called a sailboat.


BTW here is are some references;


https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/electric-cars-are-not-necessarily-clean/



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug-in_electric_vehicles_in_the_United_States

 

[JLD]

This is true. A motor scooter is probably the most efficient way to move one person and minimal gear.

Wish I had access to my photos, I have some pictures I took in India 3 - 4 years ago, with a family of four (mother, father, and two kids) on a single motorcycle!

Jim

 

[rgano]

Trend in transportation is away from petrol and diesel. Marine technology is mainly derivative from transportation. Oil and gas are going to be all time lows as this trend continues. More dramatic recently due to covid but the trend predates covid and will continue after it passes. Other than petrochemicals and plastics consumption is down. This is necessary to combat climate change but also is inevitable as alternative energy technologies improve to the point that even with improvements in internal combustion engines they are cost competitive and non polluting.
For trawlers the goal is range for the full displacement vessels and is energy intensive for faster vessels. Hybrid boats such as green line and Arksen fill the void to some extent but for those without deep pockets diesel remains the way to carry the most BTUs in the smallest package at the least cost.
We run on ancient dead plankton from the age of dinosaurs and before. Are our vessels the dinosaurs? Is there a future for trawler Yachts for non 1%ers?

Here is my experience with this kind of thinking:
Before I even graduated from the US Naval Academy, my superior academic standing perforce involved me in an unwanted interview with the single nuclear qualified company officer (of 36 companies). The pitch was "we want you to go to nuclear power school." Most nuclear power at that time in the US Navy was subs, and I wanted NO part of that. At postgraduate school a year later, I was delivered into the hands of a second nuclear power school screener - no again. A few years later, I was one of several officers chosen out of the department head school of 108 officers to sit through a slide show presentation extolling the virtues of nuclear power. By now I had friends who had chosen that route and lived to regret it, surface AND subsurface. Also by now there were several nuclear powered surface warfare (my chosen specialty) ships in the fleet besides the single carrier USS Enterprise. These were one-off ships of the cruiser variety, and the briefer went on and on about how the Navy was "Moving this way" at that we would be in the vanguard of officers eligible to command these surface nukes which would by the way eventually displace the hundreds of other destroyers and cruisers out there. Also all of the surface nukes out there in my rank (LT) had been selected to promotion to lieutenant commander. So I asked him how many Lts were involved - seven. The Navy didn't have a choice but to promote these seven because they had spent so much money and time training them. I was also convinced that the cost and risk of running nukes would be far more expensive than ten fossil fueled ships and that due to their radioactive plant they'd never see combat nor a lot of the ports of the world which restrict their entry. I therefore asked him to make sure the Navy knew I would never go nuke and to please take my name off Admiral Rickover's hit list. Today there are ZERO nuclear surface warships in the US Navy. Lots of carriers and subs where it might make sense, but not in my field of endeavor. I believe that fossil-powered trawlers will be around just like all the fossil-powered destroyers will be - far into the unseen future. By the way, our destroyers quite often refuel from the nuclear powered carriers which now have lots more tankage to store their escorts' fossil fuel.

 

[bligh]

Thanks for sharing!

Here is my experience with this kind of thinking:
Before I even graduated from the US Naval Academy, my superior academic standing perforce involved me in an unwanted interview with the single nuclear qualified company officer (of 36 companies). The pitch was "we want you to go to nuclear power school." Most nuclear power at that time in the US Navy was subs, and I wanted NO part of that. At postgraduate school a year later, I was delivered into the hands of a second nuclear power school screener - no again. A few years later, I was one of several officers chosen out of the department head school of 108 officers to sit through a slide show presentation extolling the virtues of nuclear power. By now I had friends who had chosen that route and lived to regret it, surface AND subsurface. Also by now there were several nuclear powered surface warfare (my chosen specialty) ships in the fleet besides the single carrier USS Enterprise. These were one-off ships of the cruiser variety, and the briefer went on and on about how the Navy was "Moving this way" at that we would be in the vanguard of officers eligible to command these surface nukes which would by the way eventually displace the hundreds of other destroyers and cruisers out there. Also all of the surface nukes out there in my rank (LT) had been selected to promotion to lieutenant commander. So I asked him how many Lts were involved - seven. The Navy didn't have a choice but to promote these seven because they had spent so much money and time training them. I was also convinced that the cost and risk of running nukes would be far more expensive than ten fossil fueled ships and that due to their radioactive plant they'd never see combat nor a lot of the ports of the world which restrict their entry. I therefore asked him to make sure the Navy knew I would never go nuke and to please take my name off Admiral Rickover's hit list. Today there are ZERO nuclear surface warships in the US Navy. Lots of carriers and subs where it might make sense, but not in my field of endeavor. I believe that fossil-powered trawlers will be around just like all the fossil-powered destroyers will be - far into the unseen future. By the way, our destroyers quite often refuel from the nuclear powered carriers which now have lots more tankage to store their escorts' fossil fuel.

 

[Art]

I confidently say [inside info]:

In the not too distant future [likely to become a recognized energy force within this decade] there will be an affordable Full-Cycle, Carbon Neutral source for liquid hydrocarbon gasoline, diesel and jet fuels.

This system of manufacturing and utilizing liquid fuels will add no new carbon into Earth's ecosphere.

By mid 2030's plans exist to be servicing substantial sectors of liquid fuel industry sales.

These Full-Cycle hydrocarbon liquid fuels will be fungible and drop-in ready to mix in any proportion with refined fossil fuels.

 

[Lepke]

Global shipping is starting to switch to LGN from MDO. New ships are built with LGN in mind. Most ports either have LGN bunkering vessels or are having them built. It's still fossil fuel, but ship MDO usage is figured in tons per day. As ships leave MDO they'll leave a huge hole in MDO and crude demand. I think diesel prices will stay low for a long time.

Crude prices have dropped again since the covid19 drop. Whatever happened to peak oil?

 

[Art]

LNG has a big future.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_LNG_Engine

"A marine LNG engine is a dual fuel engine that uses natural gas and bunker fuel to convert chemical energy in to mechanical energy. Due to natural gas’ cleaner burning properties, the use of natural gas in merchant ship propulsion plants is becoming an option for companies in order to comply with IMO and MARPOL environmental regulations. The natural gas is stored in liquid state (LNG) and the boil-off gas is routed to and burned in dual fuel engines.[1] Shipping companies have been cautious when choosing a propulsion system for their fleets. The steam turbine system has been the main choice as the prime mover on LNG carriers over the last several decades. The decades-old system on steam propelled LNG carriers uses BOG (boil-off gas). LNG carriers are heavily insulated to keep the LNG at around -160 °C – to keep it liquefied. What happens is that even with all the insulation, the LNG containment area is penetrated by heat which allows for naturally generated boil-off gas (BOG)."

 

[Knot Fast]

Wish I had access to my photos, I have some pictures I took in India 3 - 4 years ago, with a family of four (mother, father, and two kids) on a single motorcycle!

Jim

Sorry Jim. I saw a family of 5 on an scooter in Bali. Though the kids were small. Then I saw this guy with 28 rolled rugs in Bangkok. We just need to strive to operate efficiently.

I run a pair of 56 hp Yanmars at about 40 hp burning 1g/h each and we cruise our 50,000# boat at 8 mph. While we're at it, the port engine heats 20g of water to 170F in the water heater from waste heat.

For me, efficiency is an art form!

 

[Hippocampus]

My house is zero footprint. Geo and solar. In fact we sell back to grid. Maintenance is trivial and service life longer than my life. Economically makes sense even though the tax benies have fallen.
Wind /solar farms are sprouting up all over the place. Coal is pretty much a dead issue. Europe is ahead of us with alt energy electricity production. France has been nuc dependent for decades. Expect majority of ships to be autonomous and that conversion is underway. The trucking industry is already going that way. Not sure where it stands at the moment but hear for personal transportation Germany is going to outlaw diesel Volvo has already said their car line will be all electric .
I could and have traveled from Newport R.I. to Antigua on less then 200g on my prior boat but other than the engine everything was petrochemical derived. Its wind/solar alt energy devices take a lot of energy to make. Sailboats aren’t green. Just a lot greener.
Still don’t see anything that can replace the propulsion system of a full displacement trawler. Lithium is great as are fuel cells. Sure you can go to a 60’ Artnautica or Arksen but who can afford initial cost and berthing fees. Sure fuel costs plummet with the ultra low beam boats. We’ve know since slave galleys thin boats are easily driven. Hell mom and pop cruising sailboats have bigger engines then the single screw version of the Artnautica.
So the curve is clear. Less diesel consumption. Been living with large recreational boating harbors like Bristol where’s there’s no place to buy fuel. As the fishing industry has collapsed independent chanderlies on the shoreline of the harbor are gone. You need to take a car in the sailing centers like Newport or Annapolis to get a part. You can get “sailing” clothes but not a fuel filter or stainless hardware.Oil prices may be down and stay down but can see a future where it’s hard to get fuel. With the EPA regs on storage and handling near water and marginal volume in the future the small marinas may just close the fuel dock when it comes time to replace tanks. Climate change is our biggest threat. Just look at the 100 year storms , floods and fires. We need to change. Just wanted to hear what you thought before I drop the cost of a decent house on a diesel propelled trawler. Will there be a market for them down the road?

 

[rslifkin]

Alternative propulsion for boats is definitely possible now, it's just not quite practical or cost effective for most use cases yet. Hopefully it will be (either for a new boat or a retrofit) by the time our current propulsion systems become untenable.

Thinking about it, there's plenty of weight capacity for electric drive in a lot of boats. If I look at my boat, I've got a 430 lb generator and 2x 1150 lb engine/transmission combos in the engine room. And then about 2700 lbs of fuel tanks under the aft bunk. That's a good bit of weight (and space) to work with for motors and batteries.

Looking around, a pair of Tesla motors (with adequate cooling) would power this boat at its current speeds no problem. They're only about 300 lbs each, so figure 400 with cooling systems and mounts. That leaves just over 1900 lbs of capacity in the engine room, which is enough for 35 of the battery modules from a Tesla Model S. Add another 49 modules in place of the fuel tanks to equal their weight, and we've got 445 kwh of batteries (although I didn't do the math to confirm they'd actually fit). Realistically, let's knock the 84 total modules down to 80 to account for the weight of the battery cooling system, so we get 424 kwh.

Based on estimated power demand, I could run at 17 kts for somewhere around 90 - 100 minutes before the batteries are dead. At 6.5 kts, I should have somewhere around 14 hours of runtime (that estimate is a bit fuzzy). Not quite there yet, but given some further improvement in energy density and fast enough charging, I could see it working.

Price would have to come down some too, but it's not as crazy as one might think. I'm coming up with about $150k in batteries and motors, then add the cooling systems, wiring, controllers, etc. Considering a repower in this boat with modern diesel engines and a new generator would be easily in the $120k ballpark, the cost factor is only mildly crazy.

As a comparison point, with the current engines and fuel tanks in my boat, I could run for about 14 hours at 17 kts before the tanks are bone dry, or somewhere around 70 - 85 hours at 6.5 kts.

 

[Hippocampus]

Yup works for the way most boats are used but not a good option if caught in weather on passage. Even in calm weather and with solar put everywhere you can and adding wind turbines there’s a range restriction. Arksens and Ellings have diesels. As said earlier nothing to date has the energy density to match.
Kind of think about this the same as torqueedos. Great technology for the way many people use their dinghies. But for live aboards or long distance cruisers they don’t cut it. When you commonly have multiple people or heavy stores and significant distances for your dinghy to travel there is not the energy density. Especially if operating in chop, head sea or head wind. They’ve solved the range thing for cars but my diesel Jeep has 720 m range and 650 loaded going 75-80 mph. Tesla isn’t there yet. The limitation is battery technology. Has been for sometime now. Carbon and current non exploding Li take you only so far.

 

[Slowmo]

I've been party to a study looking at electrification of the transport fleet. While I can't share the data suffice to say it appears that the effect on hydrocarbon consumption really won't be meaningful for another 20 years. That was based on the most optimistic projections of electrification (i.e. when governments said they'd be electrified by xyz date, that date was used as is) and essentially ignored the major issues and hurdles. The hurdles include: 1) the US electric grid is not prepared for a major move to electric vehicles 2) the move assumes that battery technology will improve and 3) it did not evaluate the sustainability of the supply of rare earths needed. At this time alternative energy is not competitive or even close to oil. It was getting closer when oil was $70-100/bbl but at $40-50 it's still a long way off. One of the political reasons, probably the primary really, for stopping fracking is to force the price of oil back to the highs thus improving the competitiveness of alternatives. None of this says it won't eventually happen. The combination of political forces and improving economics are likely to support the move over the long run, again assuming that one of the counter forces doesn't become overwhelming. Of the counter forces the supply of rare earth metals is probably the most critical. Unless new sources are developed it could become untenable very quickly. Unfortunately the mining of these materials has a huge environment impact as does the disposal of the spent batteries. Since the electric/hybrid electric car population is so trivial compared to the fleet at this time we haven't had to deal with these issues.

For boats the issue may actually be easier. Rather than the death of trawlers electrification tends to drive more of these types of vessels. Batteries are bulky, heavy, and have low power density versus hydrocarbon. Thus slower speeds and more efficient hulls would be encouraged in order to maximize range. Vessels benefit from having a lot of open deck space which can be completely covered in solar cells to offset the low power density of the storage system. Finally, and this is a guess, I suspect the cost of the power system is a lower percentage of the total than in a car. The downside is that the lifespan of current batteries and solar cells is finite and shorter than a diesel engine,so designs should make sure that battery renewal is planned for.

 

[Woodland Hills]

My house is zero footprint. Geo and solar. In fact we sell back to grid. Maintenance is trivial and service life longer than my life. Economically makes sense even though the tax benies have fallen.
Wind /solar farms are sprouting up all over the place. Coal is pretty much a dead issue. Europe is ahead of us with alt energy electricity production. France has been nuc dependent for decades. Expect majority of ships to be autonomous and that conversion is underway. The trucking industry is already going that way. Not sure where it stands at the moment but hear for personal transportation Germany is going to outlaw diesel Volvo has already said their car line will be all electric .
I could and have traveled from Newport R.I. to Antigua on less then 200g on my prior boat but other than the engine everything was petrochemical derived. Its wind/solar alt energy devices take a lot of energy to make. Sailboats aren’t green. Just a lot greener.
Still don’t see anything that can replace the propulsion system of a full displacement trawler. Lithium is great as are fuel cells. Sure you can go to a 60’ Artnautica or Arksen but who can afford initial cost and berthing fees. Sure fuel costs plummet with the ultra low beam boats. We’ve know since slave galleys thin boats are easily driven. Hell mom and pop cruising sailboats have bigger engines then the single screw version of the Artnautica.
So the curve is clear. Less diesel consumption. Been living with large recreational boating harbors like Bristol where’s there’s no place to buy fuel. As the fishing industry has collapsed independent chanderlies on the shoreline of the harbor are gone. You need to take a car in the sailing centers like Newport or Annapolis to get a part. You can get “sailing” clothes but not a fuel filter or stainless hardware.Oil prices may be down and stay down but can see a future where it’s hard to get fuel. With the EPA regs on storage and handling near water and marginal volume in the future the small marinas may just close the fuel dock when it comes time to replace tanks. Climate change is our biggest threat. Just look at the 100 year storms , floods and fires. We need to change. Just wanted to hear what you thought before I drop the cost of a decent house on a diesel propelled trawler. Will there be a market for them down the road?

Having to take a car from the marina to buy boat parts has more to do with the Walmart/Amazon effect than it does with fossil fuels or the popularity of diesel motors. You can thank West Marine and Jeff Bezos for the death of mom and pop or local marine stores. You also cannot ignore the effect of tourist driven real estate prices and rents in popular waterside areas.

How long do you plan on owning this proposed trawler? Everything eventually “goes away “ is it 5 years, 50 years or 500 years? I expect diesel powered boats to be in widespread use for the next 150 years or more, if not in the first world than in the third. And many of them will be Detroits!

 

[ScottC]

Wish I had access to my photos, I have some pictures I took in India 3 - 4 years ago, with a family of four (mother, father, and two kids) on a single motorcycle!

Jim

I have a picture of a family of SEVEN on a single motorcycle I saw in India.

 

[markpierce]

Availability of electricity is not always reliable. Many people have experienced shutdowns for days due to fires, equipment failures, electricity shortages, and management decisions. (Sales of petroleum-powered home generators are increasing.) One will always have the energy contained in their fuel tanks.

 

[OldDan1943]

Ah yes, Kudzu (high in biomass)... another Federal Govt good idea.
Try as they might, no one has found a way to convert Kudzu into things other than wreaths to hang on your door.

The US Navy ran on bunker fuel for over 50 years. Recently the Navy has doing its best to convert to diesel from bunker fuel.
Of course, the Navy also gave away those bunker fuel burning ships to other countries. LOL

Your trawler will be safe for more than years than you and the next buyer will live.

There are still many one and two cylinder commercial fishing boat plying the waters.

 

[Woodland Hills]

One example of a drawback to going solar is that all across the American west coast the smoke from forest fires has cut the amount of power available from home rooftop solar to near zero. Those who installed diesel generators still have power. Because of the danger of power lines starting a fire the local power company has cut off electricity to many areas. In response many homes installed solar panels and batteries, others put in diesel or propane generators.

 

[Hippocampus]

Good point WH. We’re away from the house for months when out cruising. Very reassuring that the kohler kicks in and keeps the geothermal going. Goes on at least once every month or two. And that’s in the northeast. My kids make use of the house while we’re away. It’s always all set and they never need to do anything.

 

[bligh]

Kohler? Didn't you mention net zero?

Good point WH. We’re away from the house for months when out cruising. Very reassuring that the kohler kicks in and keeps the geothermal going. Goes on at least once every month or two. And that’s in the northeast. My kids make use of the house while we’re away. It’s always all set and they never need to do anything.

 

[Hippocampus]

It’s gas fed. Exercises itself periodically and runs occasionally when the grid fails. Given the amount of electricity we produce the math is still negative. Having a HERS rating so low helps. Unfortunately that’s really only feasible with new construction.
Think that segues into future trawler design. It’s much easier to utilize alt. energy sources for propulsion if the hp demand is low. One is seeing a small resurgence in designs with beam to length being very low or low prismatic coefficients such as trimarans. Issue is small usable volume for length. The new Norhavn 51 has ogles more space than a Artnautica 58 or even a dashew FPB. Perhaps there be evolution of Tenants thinking but then you still don’t circumvent the berthing and expense issues.

 

[Peter Keating]

A few years ago when the price of Diesel fuel and gasoline got out of reason I started playing with burning other fuels. I started with an '86 Ford F250 Diesel and would pour in anything with BTU value that would dissolve into used motor oil. Basically I started with 85% used oil and 15% gas then added/substituted whatever to keep the viscosity reasonable then filtered to .5 micron. The list included vegetable oils (least desirable), discarded aviation fuel samples (best results), discarded industrial liquids like alcohols and turpentine. Even found some MEK and acetone that would burn. If it said "Flamable" on the container, I'd try it. Averaged $0.15/gallon for several years.

Had an older Mercedes Diesel that would burn pretty much anything....including tiki torch oil.

 

[O C Diver]

My house is zero footprint. Geo and solar. In fact we sell back to grid. Maintenance is trivial and service life longer than my life. Economically makes sense even though the tax benies have fallen.
Wind /solar farms are sprouting up all over the place. Coal is pretty much a dead issue. Europe is ahead of us with alt energy electricity production. France has been nuc dependent for decades. Expect majority of ships to be autonomous and that conversion is underway. The trucking industry is already going that way. Not sure where it stands at the moment but hear for personal transportation Germany is going to outlaw diesel Volvo has already said their car line will be all electric .
I could and have traveled from Newport R.I. to Antigua on less then 200g on my prior boat but other than the engine everything was petrochemical derived. Its wind/solar alt energy devices take a lot of energy to make. Sailboats aren’t green. Just a lot greener.
Still don’t see anything that can replace the propulsion system of a full displacement trawler. Lithium is great as are fuel cells. Sure you can go to a 60’ Artnautica or Arksen but who can afford initial cost and berthing fees. Sure fuel costs plummet with the ultra low beam boats. We’ve know since slave galleys thin boats are easily driven. Hell mom and pop cruising sailboats have bigger engines then the single screw version of the Artnautica.
So the curve is clear. Less diesel consumption. Been living with large recreational boating harbors like Bristol where’s there’s no place to buy fuel. As the fishing industry has collapsed independent chanderlies on the shoreline of the harbor are gone. You need to take a car in the sailing centers like Newport or Annapolis to get a part. You can get “sailing” clothes but not a fuel filter or stainless hardware.Oil prices may be down and stay down but can see a future where it’s hard to get fuel. With the EPA regs on storage and handling near water and marginal volume in the future the small marinas may just close the fuel dock when it comes time to replace tanks. Climate change is our biggest threat. Just look at the 100 year storms , floods and fires. We need to change. Just wanted to hear what you thought before I drop the cost of a decent house on a diesel propelled trawler. Will there be a market for them down the road?

As mentioned previously, boat stores have vanished from the Annapolis waterfront where I lived 30 years ago, because of cost of real estate, availability of online products at lower cost, choice selection of online products, and the ridiculous parking problems of anywhere in Annapolis. While I do try to buy from the boatyard I patronize, it's only to help support them (friends). The closest I come to an auto parts store is to buy oil at Walmart.

Global climate change isn't a problem. It's a symptom of an excessive human population. Other symptoms would include depletion of the ocean's natural fish stocks, shortages of clean safe drinking water, and clearing of forests and filling of wetlands for agriculture and housing.

Until the earth's human population starts to decline and other species start to return to more normal levels, the human population will continue heading for a massive crash.

Ted

 

[Hippocampus]

Agree with what you said except”climate change isn’t a problem “. Look through the hype on both sides and if you’ve been on the water for decades you can’t deny the change in the weather, storms, seasons, fishing species available etc. and then there’s the droughts and fires. Even if you don’t believe the 6 international reports unless you live in a high rise you see it in your day to day.

 

[sunchaser]

The climate is always changing, with or without man. The past few tens of thousand years sees the earth at a 200 million year low for temperatures and CO2 levels. There is only one way to go, with or without man.

However, man's negative influence on the environment (different than climate change) is obvious in many respects once one has visited India, China, Mexico City, the US west and east coasts etc. OCD's oft mentioned concern of too many bodies speaks to a big part of the man caused problems.

95% or more of the world's population has zero concern about how we affluent ones worry about yachts, high priced off the grid systems or Teslas Vs Lucids. Future meals, clean water, personal safety and a roof over one's head take precedence.

 

[rgano]

And the beat goes on.

 

[O C Diver]

Agree with what you said except”climate change isn’t a problem “. Look through the hype on both sides and if you’ve been on the water for decades you can’t deny the change in the weather, storms, seasons, fishing species available etc. and then there’s the droughts and fires. Even if you don’t believe the 6 international reports unless you live in a high rise you see it in your day to day.

I think you missed my point. I'm not denying climate changing isn't a problem, but to believe it isn't a direct cause of the human population growth over the last 150 years, is worse than denying it doesn't exist. In simple math terms, if you reduce the average human's impact on the planet (which would be near impossible as long as China and India don't participate) by 10%, and the earth's human population grows by 10%, you have accomplished absolutely zero! And the net 10% population growth continues to increase the other problems I previously listed.

Ted

 

[Art]

The climate is always changing, with or without man. The past few tens of thousand years sees the earth at a 200 million year low for temperatures and CO2 levels. There is only one way to go, with or without man.

However, man's negative influence on the environment (different than climate change) is obvious in many respects once one has visited India, China, Mexico City, the US west and east coasts etc. OCD's oft mentioned concern of too many bodies speaks to a big part of the man caused problems.

95% or more of the world's population has zero concern about how we affluent ones worry about yachts, high priced off the grid systems or Teslas Vs Lucids. Future meals, clean water, personal safety and a roof over one's head take precedence.

Correct on all counts.

That said: It is up to us [the affluent ones] to figure ways out of cataclysmic global climate/ecosystem changes that will too soon ruin Earth's life supporting ecosystem.

I plan to send you a PM.

Cheers!

Art

 

[Hippocampus]

So take it back a step.
Due to petrochemical dependent factory farming less than 2% of the population raises food and there’s still enough to be exported. That permits survival of an increase in population. Although we are now 28th in quality of life measures we still educate the engineers, physicians and scientists allowing a increasingly positive biologic quotient (survival long enough to be able to procreate). You are right more people more destruction of the environment. But think about why more people are possible. Even in third world countries it comes back to petrochemicals at present.