2 ms·
Need to read the article -- my library doesn't have access yet but this seems way too sensationalized. I have no doubt the world will change. I don't think th
by alphasierra 14y ago
Need to read the article -- my library doesn't have access yet but this seems way too sensationalized.
I have no doubt the world will change. I don't think that we could prevent it even if we turned off the figurative taps but there's no way that the article advocates that the planet will not support life after this change.
Does it go into the probable losses and the mechanisms for those losses (heat/acidification/etc)? From that we could identify probable impacts to the nutrient cycle.
- alphasierra 14y agoOk was able to read (thanks scarmig). Their claim is that we alter approximately 2.27 acres worth of environment to support each person (mainly nutrients). This comes out to 40%?? of the land of Earth being transformed and showing state change. Through this transformation of land and our consumption of primary nutrients we currently consume between 20-40% of the biota production and also degrade the whole production chain. Their claim is that at current human growth levels we will exceed 50% transformation of the land mass and this will cause rapid, unpredictable changes (state change) and we will reach this in 2025. Interestingly, they claim that through greenhouse gas emissions we have delayed this massive state change (by putting more energy into the environment).