• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Moss Towers of London

Elixir

Made in America
Joined
Sep 23, 2012
Messages
30,349
Location
Mountains
Basic Beliefs
English is complicated
Say hello to the capital’s new City Trees

Something about this creeps me out. But the footprint of this ugly rug vs that of 275 regular trees (a species with which I may not be familiar) might make it a must for the perpetuation of human population growth... another thing that creeps me out.

trees.JPG
 
Say hello to the capital’s new City Trees

Something about this creeps me out. But the footprint of this ugly rug vs that of 275 regular trees (a species with which I may not be familiar) might make it a must for the perpetuation of human population growth... another thing that creeps me out.

View attachment 25613

Population growth isn't perpetuating. Birth rates globally are already below replacement level, and after demographic lag, the world population will cease to grow within the next four or five decades. It's unlikely that there will ever be more than twelve billion people alive at the same time; And we already produce enough food for that many.

Worrying about population growth is a sure sign that the worrier hasn't looked in detail at the topic for over forty years. It was understandable in the 1950s and '60s; By the '70s it was clear to the demographers that the worries were over (due to the invention of the oral contraceptive, the increasing education of girls, and the agricultural revolution); By the mid '80s the last of the great famines was over (not, it must be said, entirely due to the effort of Bob Geldof); And by the year 2000, it was clear that famine wasn't coming back, except as a local consequence of war.

Cities don't need to grow photosynthetic organisms; The surrounding countryside can do that. Greenery is a nice thing to have, but urban greenery is really only useful for its psychological effects. Cities are great for the environment, because they allow humans to be highly efficient, and they take humans away from the important exurban agricultural and wilderness areas, thereby significantly reducing our ability to damage it.

Of course, those who live in large cities can be forgiven for erroneously believing that the artificial environment they inhabit is the whole story. But cities are a tiny fraction of land use, and their contribution to plant life is therefore negligible and unimportant - other than for the psychological benefit of their citizens.

The only viable solution to urban pollution is not to emit as much of it. We should know by now that it's a bad idea to shit on our own doorstep. And indeed, the advances in pollution control in London (and other cities) since the pollution peak of the mid 20th Century suggest that we are steadily learning to not poison ourselves.
 
Back
Top Bottom