Do NASA's observations rebut the Greens rhetoric?

Old Koreelah

Well-Known Member
#21
Even if they had the ability to strip mine for flint and ochre, I don't think they would have. They cared for the land they lived on.
I used to share that romantic notion, Marty, but a lifetime of living near and working with indig. people has led me to question that. There are plenty of places where people have, over thousands of years, really changed the land thru quarrying. I agree there was respect for the land, but I suspect that nomadic lifestyle and low population density was the main factor that limited their impact on the landscape.

Wherever modern Aboriginal people live in permanent settlements they tend to bugger up the place at least as much as white fellas.
 

facthunter

Well-Known Member
#22
They didn't get involved with cyanide and heavy metals and affect the environment and water they depend on so completely. Tap a bore and just leave it running. Aboriginals would use a part of the tree, b not kill it, never clear fell etc. They were appalled by what the early settlers did to degrade the land . The story of most settlement is take the lands riches and resources and make money, and bugger anyone else.. Consider the Cedars and exotic timbers of the NSW Ranges as an example. Mining is necessary but the damage (all of it) must be taken into the equation and not just left to someone else to fix later when the profits have gone overseas to places like Switzerland where the consequences are not even thought about. Out of sight and out of mind.. How much topsoil and creek bank erosion has been lost for wheat production with excess tilling and overstocking? This environment is very delicate and fragile.. NO ONE has the entitlement to destroy it. Nev
 

pmccarthy

Well-Known Member
#23
They didn't get involved with cyanide and heavy metals and affect the environment and water they depend on so completely. Tap a bore and just leave it running. Aboriginals would use a part of the tree, b not kill it, never clear fell etc. They were appalled by what the early settlers did to degrade the land . The story of most settlement is take the lands riches and resources and make money, and bugger anyone else.. Consider the Cedars and exotic timbers of the NSW Ranges as an example. Mining is necessary but the damage (all of it) must be taken into the equation and not just left to someone else to fix later when the profits have gone overseas to places like Switzerland where the consequences are not even thought about. Out of sight and out of mind.. How much topsoil and creek bank erosion has been lost for wheat production with excess tilling and overstocking? This environment is very delicate and fragile.. NO ONE has the entitlement to destroy it. Nev
I agree 100%. I have seen many bores in the GAB running to waste on pastoral properties. Yes, miners should completely clean up after themselves. I am appalled by the state Qld strip mines have been left in. It is a failure of regulation (ie government) because company directors have legal obligations to shareholders to maximise benefits (which means minimise costs) and to governments to comply with legislation so they don't have the authority or discretion to spend more than the government requires.
 

Litespeed

Well-Known Member
#24
Mining creates only approx 5% of our GDP and 1% of jobs.

So we could easily afford not to do it, especially since it uses foreign capital, equipment and rarely pays any tax.
 

Litespeed

Well-Known Member
#26
Mining only produces most of our stuff because our economics is geared that way. Yes some is essential but only a small amount, the rest can be made other ways. And those alternatives make more jobs and pollute far less.
 

pmccarthy

Well-Known Member
#27
Made other ways out of what? Steel and concrete for example are 100% mining products. Aluminium for planes. Copper. And all the plastic and fibreglass stuff made from petroleum products which another crazy movement is trying to shut down. We could live on fish caught from wooden boats I suppose, but we wouldn’t have the metal saws to cut the wood.
 

willedoo

Well-Known Member
#28
pmmccarthy, you're missing the big picture. We could replace most things with bamboo. It's easy to grow. We could make bamboo implements to grow the bamboo and fertilize it with our own manure. Also we can build houses from it and get some rocks to pound the bamboo into fibre to make our lap laps. Walking everywhere will be good for our health, and we won't need cars anyway because we won't have jobs to drive to unless we are lucky enough to work on a bamboo farm within walking distance. We won't miss the other stuff; who needs steel, concrete, aluminium, glass, titanium and all that other useless stuff anyway.
 

facthunter

Well-Known Member
#29
Ever heard of re cycling? We can't be bothered and it goes to landfill. You can get most minerals out of seawater. How many tonnes of rock have to be pulverized and treated with Cyanide to get an ounce of gold.? Gold is used for "ornaments".mostly. Check on how polluting gold mining is. at extra low concentrations..
Aluminium is CLAY... Bauxite. extremely abundant. The big cost is energy to extract it refine it./ Like copper. Both easily recycled.. Single use plastic MUST be banned It's now everywhere and even showing in breast milk.. Stuff should last longer and be designed to be recycled at the beginning.. Iron and nickel are most of what the earth is at it's core..
Coals like most sedimentary things has impurities that are released when it's burned. Crude oil has a high % of Sulphur. Can be around 8% There are mountains of Sulphur that are of no real value. It's extremely toxic if oxidized, luckily not so in it's basic 3 allotropes. where it's fairly inert.
Flax could be used to replace a lot of single use plastic, paper etc. We just use the most cheap way and don't concern ourselves with waste and the tonnes of garbage that affluent societies "create" for each person each year. is just incredible and not able to be sustained on any measure. Nev
 

willedoo

Well-Known Member
#30
It would be all right if we were a bunch of hippies living in the hills. But we are a planet of 7 billion people and growing. Most live in cities. To get by on recycling we'd have to shed a few billion people.

I agree that we can do without mining gemstones, they are not necessary. A small amount of gold is necessary and present in a lot of high tech applications, but again, only in small quantities. Gold is a very important currency in the world. In my opinion, the U.S. dollar's power is not all used for good. I wouldn't like to see a world with only Fiat currencies; it places too much power in too few hands.

I'm not against all these ideas, just being realistic. To do away with a significant amount of mining, we have to do away with a significant amount of people. With current growth, how do we do without steel and the coking coal to smelt it. Re-cycling is a drop in the ocean compared to the amount of steel the world needs to do what we are doing. The point I'm making is that the demand for these basic products is far greater than the amount we can re-cycle.

I'd love to dream away about all the alternatives, but I just can't see re-cycling what we already have being able to keep up with the demand. It's quantity of scale that I see as the issue.
 

Litespeed

Well-Known Member
#31
Where do I start,......

Fiberglass etc can be made from organic sources or just replaced with natural fibres like hemp. Resins can also be from a organic base and they don't burn easy either.
Concrete has lots of replacement options which means it can be greatly reduced in use. Ever seen a rammed earth wall?
Ever heard of Laminated wood beams?
We are now building skyscrapers out of the stuff, all fully reusable or recyclable at end of buildings life.

We even have hemp panels which are similar in spec to honeycomb panels made of carbon and aramid. These have been available for over 20 years and have been used in aircraft. Why don't we see more of this? Industry is stuck in old school tech and deeply embedded with big oil and mining products.

There is almost no product on the planet that can't be done using organic bases instead of oil- which started as plant matter in the beginning.

But what about say a fire door? Yes been made in Asia and Europe from hemp and resin for 30 years and much higher fire rated than the old school ones and weigh a lot less.

Most mining is completely redundant. When we need a refined mining product either recycle it or use renewable power to create it.
 

octave

Well-Known Member
#32
I do think mining of some sort will be with us for some time but it is interesting to see where engineering is going. Concrete is extremely energy intensive and its use is a substantial contributor to co2 production. Wood, on the other hand, is renewable and it locks up CO2 for at least the life of the building. The wood, of course, would have to be harvested in a sustainable way.

Vancouver is home to the world’s tallest wooden building...for now

https://edition.cnn.com/style/artic...er-trend-catching-fire-duplicate-2/index.html
 

Litespeed

Well-Known Member
#33
An awefully large amount of that steel we keep making is used for wasteful purposes- just look at all the ghost cities in China. That represents a massive amount of coal, steel and concrete that may never be fully utilised, if at all.

When we don't account for the true costs of these materials it is all too easy to waste the natural, financial and human capital of the planet.
 

Litespeed

Well-Known Member
#34
How do we make steel with coking coal?

It is called carbon, ......those green things in the forest make it. Just use pyrolysis you get gases to burn for power or use a reactor for long chain molecules and make plastics and also gives you carbon. Not real hard and have been doing it for centuries.
 

spacesailor

Well-Known Member
#35
"Gold is used for "ornaments".mostly".
ALL the contact's in this laptop re gold plated, Gold the Only metal that doesn't corrode.
Thats why its good to hang around your neck, No rust or other stain.
spacesailor
 

coljones

Well-Known Member
#36
List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions - Wikipedia

If China wanted to increase their per capita emissions to equal Australia or USA its total greenhouse emissions would be enormous. There is a moral obligation on the US and Australia to reign in their per capita emissions to at least that of Europe or even China.

I lived in Newcastle for a while. We once (only once) left a window open. BHP never offered to clean to house, the furniture or the washing as their compensation for the foul pollution they were dumping through the house and the rest of Newcastle..
 

Yenn

Well-Known Member
#37
Some funny things here.
Keatings 17% mortgage rates, that's when I bought a house. Since then rates are at a ridiculous low, but there are many repossesed houses in this area. Due to low rates allowing idiots to build houses in a boom time and not being able to keep up the re payments in the bust which followed. All the experts said there wouldn't be a bust.
Population density in Australia is 3 per sq. km according to OME, but wherever I look it is way higher. Even where I am it is 20 and that is nowhere near average for the settled areas. That 3 per km includes vast areas that are just not worth settling in. but I bet the Sydney or Melbourne are are way higher and in my opinion, not worth living in.
Todays news is that there is a senate committee looking into the extintion rates for Australian fauna. we are supposedlly obliterating fauna at a very high rate compared with the rest of the world. Nobody stopped to think that Asia, Europe and the Americas have already caused the extinction of more species than we ever had.
 

Marty_d

Well-Known Member
#38
Australia's land area: 7.692 million square km
Australia's population: 24.6 million people

24.6/7.692 = 3.198 people/square km.

However there's a hell of a lot of square km with no people at all in them.
 

Marty_d

Well-Known Member
#40
From what I've read, the poisoning of permanent waterholes was by use of a mild vegetation-based poison which stunned the fish (was this where "stunned mullet" came from?)

Hardly compares with decades of irrigation mis-management leading to a million fish dying.
 
Top Bottom