Overpopulation addendum

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Countryside : One Thread

I've been following the post on overpopulation and many people express the thought that there is plenty of land and resources if only we'd make better/more efficient use of it. I also have been keeping an ear tuned into the energy crisis in the West right now, which is the reality of overpopulating an area vs idealism of what people think an area could support if human behaviour is figured out of the equation.

California and Washington are large (and hardly slam-packed) landmasses, each with adequate and various climates and microclimates, access to the ocean, and rich in taxpayer resources. However, they are locked in a Procrustian struggle of trying to decide which gets done - not supplying electricity (and therefore heat and other life support infrasystems) or loosening (theoretically temporarily - we'll see) environmental controls that keep the air and water usable for humans and other animals.

This is real world overpopulation. Do Ca. and Wa. have have unsettled land available for people to build on? Obviously the answer is yes. Can the land support more people (or even the present number) in anything like what we consider to be a quality standard of life (plenty of food, room to enjoy, and power/water to make life comfy and even a tad bit luxurious?) Just as obviously, the answer is no.

Yes, I realize that many people in these states live lives far more than a "tad bit luxurious". I also realize that many people in Ca. also live in deplorable conditions without elec. and even, in cases, running water. There are a large handful of over-users and a large percentage of have-nots, but if you evened out the resource usage amongst the entire populations of these two states, it would just about come out to a lower-middle class to middle class lifestyle for everyone, certainly one considered fair and not too excessive. Therefore it is my opinion that these two states are overpopulated for their current technological and political development.

Could the energy be created and delivered more efficiently and effectively? Probably, but folks get what they vote for, so obviously the population there is not ready to make the sacrifices neccessary to ensure this level of production. Overpopulation issues and the discussions produced by said are generally lacking in one vital thing: they fail to take into account the fact the a population is made up of people , people who are stubborn, and exclusionary, and self serving and all of the otehr traits which result in these types of problems in the first place, and they always will be. You simply cannot take the human element out of population issues. To do so would make it an oxymoron - you can't have a population without people - individual, thinking, voting people.

Because of this factor, these two states have to face the worst type of decision - to either cut the quality of life, sometimes drastically, of their human inhabitants or to face the possiblilty of doing long term damage to the environment by ignoring environmental laws and guidelines which were no doubt only emplaced when the metaphorical roof was leaking in the first place, and are barely able to do what they were set up to do under the best of conditions.

That's overpopulation folks - being unable to support our mass without damaging our environment (which makes future support harder and so on ad infinitum). Yes, it's limited, and yes, there are ways around it. But it's here, and it's real, and all cancers start small.

-- Soni (thomkilroy@hotmail.com), December 13, 2000

Answers

Soni, The article in the new issue on the oil wells is very interesting. After reading it, the bio-desiel and windmill articles fit right in.I can't seem to put the issue down since it arrived.

-- Jay Blair in N. AL (jayblair678@yahoo.com), December 13, 2000.

Soni, I wonder about market forces. The price of natural gas just tripled, and electricity prices are going to go through the roof. So, I guess when it gets even more expensive, we'll just have the rich folks with heat, and more poor folk at the shelters.

Thank you for the post. I live in Washington State. We are being asked to conserve electricity and we are in a cold snap. I don't mind conserving (not much more we could do! We heat with wood, dry our clothes on a rack in front of the fireplace, use the microwave, don't have a bunch of tacky Christmas lights, etc.) however, I get a little disgruntled, thinking about all the lights on in Las Vegas! If they could send the current to L.A. instead of to the casinos, maybe WA wouldn't have to send our power down there. Or vice versa, as is sometimes the case.

But, whatever.... btw, the city of Seattle has their own power company, with hydro dams up on the Skagit River. The rest of the state is pretty much under the jurisdiction of Bonneville Power Authority as I recall.

-- sheepish (rborgo@gte.net), December 13, 2000.


sheepish, Washington State ought to tax the export of power to a foreign country (California), then at least its citizens would get some benefit.

-- JLS in NW AZ (stalkingbull007@AOL.com), December 13, 2000.

Soni, your post made me chuckle a little. Living without electricity and running water is 'deplorable conditions'? I venture a guess that were you to write something like that in the Countryside magazine, you'd soon be flooded with letters from people who live that way by choice and love it! Do the Amish live in deplorable conditions? Do you realize that there are people who have chosen to live this way and are threatened by ex-spouses and family members about being reported and losing their children for living in these conditions? That a hundred years ago, everyone lived in 'deplorable conditions'? Living without running water often means a little more work, but there is no reason for it to be inherently deplorable or unsanitary, unless the inhaabitants don't want to exert themselves to keep things clean and sanitary. I've lived that way many times, in many areas and circumstances, so I do know what is involved with such a lifestyle. from what I have heard, CA is having a hard time supplying enough electricty right now because people want to run their X-mas lights all day and night! Why don't they just turn them on for a few hours in the evening, and turn them off when they go to bed?! Would that be such a terrible hardship? We are a wasteful society that has gotten used to being that way, and we can hardly distinguish between luxuries( a full tub bath every night, green lawns in a place that is desert,unlimited use of energy, whatever we want NOW!), and necessities( clean air, water, food, and shelter). What I have seen of WA is not at all overpoulated, except for Spokane, but then I live near the Eastern side of the state. Yes, we need to cut the standards of living down to where they are reasonable and sustainable. also, may I add, we need to send illegal aliens back home, maybe figure out a way for them to be happy and improve things there.

-- Rebekah (daniel1@itss.net), December 13, 2000.

I think it was a very insightful post, Soni.

Rebekah, no running water when you live cheek to jowl with tons of other people? Where do they get the water from -- no yards for wells, and possibly no water down below to tap into anyway? Where are they going to put the composting toilets/outhouses, since there's no water to flush the toilets? What about the people who only have electric heat -- no electricity, no heat? People who have nowhere else to go? What efforts can they make to live in sanitary and safe conditions?

Maybe they should move elsewhere? Even if they get together some money, where are they going to find cheap land? This board is rife with postings about how expensive land is. Do you really believe that there is enough land (much less affordable) for all urbanites to move out to the country and have their own self-supporting homesteads? Never mind whether they would or wouldn't, is there enough? If you say there is, where is it?

-- Joy Froelich (dragnfly@chorus.net), December 13, 2000.



California does have lots of windmills, out on the edge of LA, San Bernadino area. I drove thru them a few times. I don't know how much the windmills contribute to the power, but at least they have invested in them as alternatives. There were thousands of them.

-- Cindy in Ky (solidrockranch@msn.com), December 14, 2000.

Those windmills augment power on Palm Springs, I believe. One of the problems is that no one knows how to live frugally anymore. Particularly in CA.....just an observation from an ex-resident.

We have the conglomerates and corporations and many myriad of little amnipulations of prices to also take into account.I believe there will be a day when the oil fails to flow. Not because it is all gone, but because it has been regulated to no longer be cost effective and we will be completely at the whims of other countries. Also, I do think we should have explored renewable energy with a lot more vigor than we have.

Interesting post,, Soni. I don't agree with your conclusion that it's because of overpopulation, though. I think it's because of poor management and lack of foresight as opposed to population.

-- Doreen (animalwaitress@excite.com), December 14, 2000.


I especially like to watch movies that take place in Scotland and Ireland to see the countryside and houses. One we saw a few weeks ago (can't remember name) showed all the houses in a row. Well, every backyard was very long and narrow leading to the alley, and in every backyard was a big garden and hen house and stacks of wood and even rabbits, every yard. It is so cool is see little suburban places like this. I lived in a neighborhood like this in Phoenix, asphalt street in front and little country places in back, and we could have birds or even a horse there. Peacocks walked down the streets, and it was a real fancy neighborhood too, with irrigation water. Just some thoughts.

-- Cindy in Ky (solidrockranch@msn.com), December 14, 2000.

The oil situation in this issue of countryside covers it all. Just read it with an open mind. The facts are all there. You have less than a decade to adjust. Just how do you adjust the population?

-- Nick (wildheart@ekyol.com), December 14, 2000.

J L S . California ships 25% of its power out to other states!So to cut us of might be like cutting of your nose to spite your face.I have been giving this a lot of thought and here are a few Ideas, All new developments in calif electricity and or heat must be run 25% or more on solar [we have the sun why not use it?]and bath water should be recycled to use on lawns, they could install under ground water tanks for this with a pump to get it to sprinklers.Tax credits to homes recycling water and using solar or wind power.Goverment help to retrofit older homes to solar and water storage.I think I will sugest it to the planning committee, cant wait to see there faces!

-- kathy h (ckhart55@earthlink.net), December 14, 2000.


-- kathy h, 25% of what. What they produce or consume. The hydo systems in Washington, BPA, is a major supplier of power to CA. One of the largest nuclear plants in the US, located west of Phoenix, ships a great share of its power to CA (Mostly owned by CA). Don't let anyone kid you, California is a net importer of power. One of the reasons your power rates are going up is the state can not control the price of power it imports.

-- JLS in NW AZ (stalkingbull007@AOL.com), December 14, 2000.

Please, read the article about the energy/oil supply situation in the current Countryside VERY carefully. Then read the March 1998 Scientific American article on the end of cheap oil. Then visit the RunningOnEmpty site -- http://www.egroups.com/group/RunningOnEmpty -- and then you'll understand what I was talking about in my original post on the overpopulation thread. This isn't a maybe, like y2k. This is real. It's already happening. Fertilizer plants in the Midwest are already shutting down because natural gas prices are so high.

-- Cash (cash@andcarry.com), December 14, 2000.

Cash, I'm in agreement with you. One of the many reasons that I feel we are overpopulated.

-- Joy Froelich (dragnfly@chorus.net), December 14, 2000.

Rebekah - I was referring to people who live in substandard housing in substandard, such as condemned housing, tin shacks, and other "slum lord"-type conditions. Living without running water and electrity is not a problem if you are prepared to deal with it alternatively; however, as someone mentioned, hen there are no wells and the codes will not allow you to just start digging, and there are no ways to get heat and water save from natural or man-made (and often dangerously polluted) waterways, the lack of these resources becomes an insurmountable burden.

My mother lived for several years with busted drains and still has unpotable water (although the landlord was finally intimidated into fixing the pipes) and if she was older and/or had not spent most of her life as a hippy/homesteader type, he situation could have caused many more problems than it did. Even with her lifestyle training, she still had trouble lifting the 5-gallon buckets of sinkwater that she collected under the kitchen sink to take it outside, and of course I'm sure that it was a breeding ground for bacteria that a young child or less robust adult could have been at risk around, let alone "do it yourself" toilets and other make-do ways that were suggested. At least she could flush (when the power was on to run the pump - there's no way she could've afforded a generato, let alone the gas to run it, as an alternative, and neither can most of these folks.)

I've lived a lot of my childhood in condemned-when-we-moved-out housing, often with spotty utilities, so I know whereof I speak. Sometimes we had to thaw snow for water to use the "facilities" in the winter when there was no water for whatever reason, and for a great deal of the time, electricity was foregone in exchange for miniscule amounts of food. Only my mother's learning and bent toward that sort of lifestyle saved us from sickness and exposure. If she'd been a typical American, educated only with typical American knowledge, no doubt we would have been seriously at risk for many lifestyle-related illnesses, and possibly even death. Many families aren't lucky enough to have a hippy Momma running the joint. Those are undeniably deplorable conditions.

-- Soni (thomkilroy@hotmail.com), December 16, 2000.


Our state governor (WA) has petitioned Secretary Richardson about having to send our power out. We have several businesses that have shut down and laid off workers owing to business costs out of control b/c of power costs (Georgia Pacific in Bellingham is one.) One problem with sending power to some of the CA companies, is that there are several in CA on the verge of bankruptcy (b/c of their power buying problems)and there is concern that the state wouldn't get paid. On the other hand, there is an aluminum company up here that laid off its workers in order to stop production so they can then sell THEIR allotment of power for a much greater profit than they would make by producing aluminum.

It's weird around here. I agree that the article in Countryside is worth checking out. We have had windstorms for a few days and got some snow dumped on us last night and we have lost power for several hours at a time for a couple of days running. Time to get the genset out and get ready for an interesting winter. Glad we have fuel for that. What happens when we can't get that?

btw, California gets a lot of power from AZ also. There are two dams that I see every time I go to the Grand Canyon that come to mind...

-- sheepish (rborgo@gte.net), December 16, 2000.



Soni, how wonderful for you to have grown up with such a life- affirming mama!

Blessings!

-- Earthmama (earthmama48@yahoo.com), December 16, 2000.


kathy h, a point about recycling posted on another thread. California, Los Angles, is leading the nation in sewage recycling. The city is either building, or it is in the planning stage, a plant to treat sewage and directly pump the treated effluent into the drinking water supply. Perhaps this is something all city dwellers can look forward to? :>)

-- JLS in NW AZ (stalkingbull007@AOL.com), December 16, 2000.

JLS, there was an identical proposal in San Diego county a little while back which was shot down by the voters. Although I supported it, I did share some of the reservations of the majority -namely, how can we be sure that the treated water will indeed be consistently potable? A single failure would expose a vast number of people to detrimental organisms, not to mention the "gross!" factor. The organizations responsible for promoting this issue did not do a very good job of reassuring us. I voted on it anyway, because I felt the benefits outweighed the disadvantages.

I no longer live in San Diego county, but I'm not far away -much closer to L.A. now- so I would love to know what's going to happen with it. Actually, I didn't even know they had adopted such a proposal! My head musta been in the clouds I guess! But this would be an enormous step in the right direction if all goes well. As much as I love California, we have numerous problems which only get worse with increased migration.

Btw, at a meeting in Riverside county the topic was the intention of SDG&E (San Diego Gas & Electric) to install huge new electrical towers right through private properties in Riverside and San Diego counties. Nevermind the unsightliness, there are serious health concerns with EMF's and cancer risk! And if property owners cannot negotiate to SDG&E's satisfaction, they will use the right of eminent-domain to obtain the land needed to put these towers (40'-60' base) on our property. We are indeed fighting it, and the battle is by no means over.

Oh sorry! My point was that SDG&E admitted that while they don't sell directly to Mexico, they do sell power to companies who themselves sell to Mexico. What is that???!!! Right, well, sorry for venting, but I feel a tiny bit better for it.

-- Leslie A. (lesliea@home.com), December 16, 2000.


I was talking with my husband about this last night, and he said that people are getting a real deal on electricty right now, that if they had to pay the real cost, it would be MUCH higher, and that people would use it more conservatively.

That got me to thinking, how many other things are like that too. disposable diapers, plastic junk, tires, I can't even begin to think about them all. What if the cost of the polution and eventual disposal/ recycling cost of the item were tacked onto it along with the purchase price? Why should a company churn out so much pollution and never do anything to clean it up? If this were done, maybe people would pick the higher quality wooden toy over the cheapo plastic one( becuse then the plastic one would cost more), and the consumer waste would decrease.

-- Rebekah (daniel1@itss.net), December 17, 2000.


The problems in California have very to do with overpopulation and everything to do with waste, mis-management, and enforced urbanization. I know because that is the very reason I left. I have lived all over California and you would be hard put to find very many people living without the afforementioned luxuries by anything other than choice. Yes there is a homeless population in California, largely caused by zoning and building laws. The simple truth is that if all those property owners in California would quit voting for false elevation of their property values, there would be plenty of housing for every Californian who chose to have it. If for instance private owners cou;d turn their garage into an apartment without having to have the signature of every beaurocrat in town, then there would be enough housing for everyone. The reason that there are people on the street in California, is because Californians want them on the street, rather than cluttering up the place. That is the sick sad truth. The reality of California is that money is more im[portant than anything else. Last year in San Luis Obispo county, a family of five was kicked out of their "substandard" apartment that was built without permits, so they could live without a roof over their heads. They were bringing the neighborhood down. The zoning enforcement officer for the county said that it was for their own good. Talk about stupid! As far as electricity goes, the deregulation in California, combined with other factors, such as plant shutdowns, has created this boondoggle. As there is more competition for power, and more people wisely shift to other more environmentally sound alternatives, things will calm down. Conservation of electricity is a dirty word in California. All those yuppees have a hard time with the idea that they should inconvenience themselves long enough to turn a few lights off. There is more than enough roomin California for many more people than there are even currently. Here is how. 1) Take advantage of the free sources of energy available in plenty in the state. The sun shines so long and so brightly over the year and yetmost of that energy goes to waste. 2) Get rid of zoning and reduce building laws for anyone other than a business enterprise. Then there be plenty of opportunity to put a roof over everyone's head. 3) turn all government owned land back into the hands of private ownership, except for maybe Yosemite. 4)Tear out every lawn and replace it with a VEGETABLE GARDEN and fruit trees. 5) Make every state govwernment position a volunteer activity, carried by citizens who hold down Gainful employment elsewhere. Then most of these guys might actually hold office for the sake of their state instead of their own pursuit of power.

Little Bit Farm

-- Little bit Farm (littlebit@calinet.com), December 18, 2000.


Does anyone have a link to the original overpopulation thread? I seem to have missed it.

Thanks.

(back to lurking)

-- Trath (trathca@yahooBLOCKED.com), December 18, 2000.


Here's one of them: http://hv.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch- msg.tcl?msg_id=004AwB

And related to it: http://hv.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch- msg.tcl?msg_id=004CFI

-- Joy Froelich (dragnfly@chorus.net), December 18, 2000.


Thanks, Joy!

-- Trath (trathca@yahooBLOCKED.com), December 19, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ