3 ms·
> Taking nickel from rainforests destroys 30 times more life than getting it from the depths So why not doing both at the same time !
by edhelas 3y ago
> Taking nickel from rainforests destroys 30 times more life than getting it from the depths
So why not doing both at the same time !
- ben_w 3y agoGetting half from the rainforest and half from the depths would cause (1+30)/2 = 15.5 times as much destruction as just getting it from the depths. (Assuming the numbers are correct; Gell-Mann Amnesia says that sadly it's reasonable cynicism to suggest we live in a world of misleading newspaper reports).
- scythe 3y agoI thought the article was reasonably upfront about the limitations of the use of total biomass as a measure of ecological value. But the subtitle, unfortunately, omits those details. There is a bit of "until next time" in all of this: nickel only covers a small part of the ocean floor, and humanity is not normally interested in exploitation down there, meaning that the vast majority of the seabed will remain intact. But we have to be aware as a society that the first time we extract a resource somewhere is almost never the last.
- czbond 3y ago^ This is Reddit level snark. Well done. I guess the thinking is the ocean approach is "see no evil or the outcomes" .... especially since large amounts of the ocean are empty enough?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]