Horizon 9 PM today - Attenborough on population

[Rum]

If you are like me and blame much of the world's current problems on the much ignored issue of massive population there's a programme on BBC2 at 9.00 tonight (Wednesday 9th Dec). Attenborough is a member of a population reduction organisation, as indeed am I. Watch and be depressed.

[klr]

Just saw in my schedule, about a minute before it started. The record button has been deployed.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I'm not finding it on the schedule.

[klr]

I'm not finding it on the schedule.

BBC2

[Bella Fortuna]

I'm not finding it on the schedule.

Over here you can watch Oprah instead.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I'm not finding it on the schedule.

Over here you can change channels to avoid Oprah instead.

[klr]

I'm not finding it on the schedule.

Over here you can watch Oprah instead.

[Drewish]

I'm not finding it on the schedule.

Over here you can watch Oprah instead.

[Rum]

I left it before the end..

The picture is terribly bleak and all I can say is I am glad I am 59 years old.

[Bella Fortuna]

I left it before the end..

The picture is terribly bleak and all I can say is I am glad I am 59 years old.

Maybe Oprah would have been preferable, after all...

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I left it before the end..

The picture is terribly bleak and all I can say is I am glad I am 59 years old.

There was a recent article in SciAm about ways to feed 60 billion people with current resources. It's sounded reasonable, but then I haven't read any articles from opposing view points.

Paging Malthus!

[klr]

I left it before the end..

The picture is terribly bleak and all I can say is I am glad I am 59 years old.

Maybe Oprah would have been preferable, after all...

No, not under any circumstances I can possibly imagine.

[Rum]

I left it before the end..

The picture is terribly bleak and all I can say is I am glad I am 59 years old.

There was a recent article in SciAm about ways to feed 60 billion people with current resources. It's sounded reasonable, but then I haven't read any articles from opposing view points.

Paging Malthus!

Yes, there are ways, though there are huge costs which nobody is talking about until (hopefully) now. The Copenhagen conference does not seem to factor this issue in much (I have had a brief look at some on-line agenda sites and I can't see anything specific).

The intro to the prog made the point that when the Titanic sunk the rich went down with the third class passengers. There isn't a 'we are OK so tough luck' option.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I left it before the end..

The picture is terribly bleak and all I can say is I am glad I am 59 years old.

There was a recent article in SciAm about ways to feed 60 billion people with current resources. It's sounded reasonable, but then I haven't read any articles from opposing view points.

Paging Malthus!

Yes, there are ways, though there are huge costs which nobody is talking about until (hopefully) now. The Copenhagen conference does not seem to factor this issue in much (I have had a brief look at some on-line agenda sites and I can't see anything specific).

The intro to the prog made the point that when the Titanic sunk the rich went down with the third class passengers. There isn't a 'we are OK so tough luck' option.

I'll have to dig up that article, it's still in the "current" basket, I think. Basically the author calls for "vertical farms", skyscrapers doing hydroponics. A building with a one acre footprint could support 60 acres of crops, one floor above the other. And you'd be able to vary the harvest times so there would always be fresh food available. Put the outlets on the ground floor and you'd have little "to market" cost. Like I said, sounds nice. He's been getting air time on TV as well.

[Pappa]

If you are like me and blame much of the world's current problems on the much ignored issue of massive population there's a programme on BBC2 at 9.00 tonight (Wednesday 9th Dec). Attenborough is a member of a population reduction organisation, as indeed am I. Watch and be depressed.

I disagree that population per se is the issue. What's the figure? Something like 5% of the world's population use 95% of it's resources (or something vaguely like that). That's not a population problem, but a consumption one. I don't think we have any idea what the upper limit to the population of earth is... every time they predict catastrophy it doesn't actually happen. That's not to say I don't think it's a serious concern. I dislike any suggestion that we should increase our productivity to help feed all the world's people. All that would happen is that the world would have more people who were starving because the population would increase past the new carrying capacity again.