5 ms·
Looks like we have already dealt with the problem by putting the waste into a giant lake. Earth is gigantic. This lake takes up maybe, what, .00001% of surface
by javert 12y ago
Looks like we have already dealt with the problem by putting the waste into a giant lake.
Earth is gigantic. This lake takes up maybe, what, .00001% of surface area? And is even less consequential by volume.
- XorNot 12y agoExactly - if this area is localized and isn't doing something like slowly polluting ground water, then I'm not entirely sure there's a problem here.
- rorykoehler 12y agoThe earth is not gigantic. It's tiny and it's also the only one we have. If this was an isolated case then maybe I would agree that it could be let slide but the effect humans are having on the environment is unprecedented and causing a mass extinction. There is no excuse for this kind of small mindedness. It would take very little effort to contain the waste in tanks until we figured out what to do with it.
- javert 12y agoThere is an excuse for this "small mindedness," it's that I think human well-being is strictly more important than the well-being of other organisms. And to think otherwise would be monstorous.
- rorykoehler 12y agoClearly human well-being is intrinsically linked with planetary well-being. We are part of the system not separate from it. We are screwing ourselves by screwing the planet.