Yep. And one of the biggest causes of widespread extinctions among a population - critical resource exhaustion. We "human animals", are well along that path as well. I give us 200 years left on this planet, if that, if we continue on the present course without alteration. Some estimations don't even give us that long.
Aren't you forgetting the power necessary to both ship and store that food, such that it remains in an edible/usable state? When the oil runs out, and it costs too much to ship "fresh" food from one side of this country to the other, and it costs too much to leave electric refridgerators on all of the time - what then?
Yes. Except, guess what - there have been *additional* holes that have been observed, and where those holes were, were above heavily-industrialized areas. So while there may have been "natural" holes near the poles, we've gone and created more!
So explain the holes in the ozone layer above industrialized areas, not at the poles then.
Why does this remind me so much of the "highway littering" thread. Basically, it seems to be a part of human nature, to take pending issues, and declare them "not my problem". That's what those 80% have done, they feel that the "minority" (so-called 3rd-world) population should take the brunt of both the blame and shoulder the costs of the things that the majority have done. Like forcing prisoners to clean up our highways through manual labor, all while those that litter continue to do so, and at the same time, declare "There is no problem - because it's not my problem." Short-sighted in the extreme.
I've seen it first-hand. I have relatives with a place in NH. A nice little place, in the woods, off of a lake. The lake is beautiful, and pristine. Unfortunately, there is very little wildlife/fish in the lake as well. Why? Because corporations dumped chemicals in the area, and it polluted the lake, and residents/gov't either did little to stop it, or looked the other way when it was happening. A large reason why is because NH is a "poor" state, more so than MA, less so than ME, and is dependent on other sources of revenue because of there not being certain taxes there. So the risk of "offending" corporations in that state, by actively enforcing environmental laws, could have a non-trivial negative effect on the state's economy. All while the wildlife near the lakes die. It really is sad. I enjoy fishing, myself, and to see such a lack of fish there was rather disappointing.
Do you have a source for that? Is it speaking in terms of numbers, of which most of those are likely to be younger trees, or in terms of overall mass of trees? Because that definately doesn't jive with what I've seen locally.
I find that statement even more laughable than the "the sky is falling" comments. At least those have some basis. What magic technology do we have to replace oil, that is both cheap, easily available, and readily usable?
Cleaner != more alive, as my comment about a NH lake showed. A dead, embalmed, person at a funeral, can appear to be "more neat and clean" than a living being can. But that's not a good thing, given the context.
Of all people, if you ride a motorcycle, then surely you must at least have some environmental concerns, even if the "sensationalist" rantings are a bit over-the-top (kind of like PETA).
link
Now consider that level of ozone depletion over populated/industrialized regions of the world, with this statistic: link
You're right that the changes appear to be somewhat seasonal, but the question is, how did those substances get into the upper-atmosphere to begin with? Although there are natural substances that can also cause ozone-depletion effects, a good majority of the substances appear to be man-made ones. The fact that the ozone layer has been continously in decline ("thinning") over many industrialized regions, is perhaps the more direct and concerning statistic. I may have mis-spoken that there was an actual "hole", but I do remember some news reports a few years back about some significant ozone-layer observations over populated areas. That seems to correlate with what I've linked/quoted. I'm working on ozone observation data over the South Pole; the problem is, most of this info is based on studies that were only done, after there seemed to be a "problem".
So if the entire African continent had the same standard of living as North America or western Europe, environmental destruction would be less of an issue?
Facebook
Twitter