Methane and CO2 production, loss of habitat etc

Nitrate based fertilizer is what we use almost everywhere

Once we get cheap energy through fission or fusion (the one we don’t have) it will be easy to clean up the mess we made. We can do it now, it’s just not energy efficient.

It slowly pollutes the water tables that it sinks into

use hydroponics, now we just need to have the energy to synthesize water to feed them

>implying greens and normies will allow mass adoption of fission
It's the correct answer but we'll always get fearmongering

It's sad

Fission is safer then anything. It doesn’t have radiation and if it has a melt down, it just breaks and stop making that energy. It’s like the opposite of the other lol.

i think you mean fusion?

Yeah he has them backwards.

I'd be less concerned with food and energy, more concerned with the raw materials, such as rare earth minerals, that go into everything modern society uses. We have a lot for current uses but as society develops and the rest of the world catches up, we'll see just how long they hold out before we have to expand beyond Earth.

So once we have cheap energy, we can adapt more vehicles like trains to hall goods. Cutting down emissions massively. (I might)

Met, so you watch Issiac Author on YouTube?

Nope

@Atkins what's your source for Deirdre being on the EFF advisory board?

Never heard of him

Fission is nuclear power

Fission and Fusion are both nuclear arent they?

https://www.eff.org/about/advisoryboard

Different types but yes

https://relationshipscience.com/person/deirdre-mulligan-61983629 this one seems to corroborate at least

You should, I think if everyone watched him.. they would instantly chill lol. He is our carl sagon (sry spelling off, kinda meh)

fission is current nuclear power, fusion is what we are working on

Fusion is the goal then

Fusion is the sun

Thanks for that G

Yes

Once we have fusion, we can have a decent life for all imo. It’s really the next level of civilization. Like what the internet did for communication.

@Eric Black eh, I'm not actually concerned about it though. I'll long be dead before it becomes an issue and recycling will delay it. Then there's the potential for converting some types of materials into uses for others.

@Atkins thx

Met, we might be 10 years out. We are very close

matter doesn't disappear, but the energy required to turn it back into what is useful for us is way too much

at least until we nail down fusion, and even then

I highly doubt 10 years out. People have constantly said the same about oil yet continued exploration finds new pockets of what ever resource is being sought after.

Either way, our grandchildren will have it and it will be a way to fix the earth. Not to mention leave it, again issiac authors videos are epic on such things.

I would not be surprised to see the first prototype asteroid mines in the next 20 years or so

That doesn't mean we shouldn't be careful. It does mean I don't necessarily buy into the doom and gloom of worst case scenario.

Right, because oil is still the cheapest per investment. Once fusion is online, that’s way different and the next monopoly of energy will be on that tech. Electric cars are paving the way for that now.

It’s also kinda why I feel socialism will win out. The governments ability to make promises to citizens looking for hand outs. “Energy is a right” 2044

i think all the shit we are sending off into space is a bigger danger to depleting our resources than making stuff on earth. At least most stuff on earth stays on earth and you can get some of that material back once the items are no longer useful. doesn't work as well when you send shit off into space.

Not sure what fusion and electric cars have to do with my statement. Oil was an example of how our estimates can continue to be wrong. - a response to your 10 year comment on how long rare earth minerals may last.