“There’s No Tomorrow” – Problems With How We Use Our Fuels

When looking for documentaries I found this short documentary called There’s No Tomorrow. Here is a blurb of what it’s about:

There’s No Tomorrow is a half-hour animated documentary about resource depletion, energy and the impossibility of infinite growth on a finite planet.

Inspired by the pro-capitalist cartoons of the 1940s, the film is an introduction to the energy dilemmas facing the world today.

“The average American today has available the energy equivalent of 150 slaves, working 24 hours a day. Materials that store this energy for work are called fuels. Some fuels contain more energy than others. This is called energy density.”

“Economic expansion has resulted in increases in atmospheric nitrous oxide and methane, ozone depletion, increases in great floods, damage to ocean ecosystems, including nitrogen runoff, loss of rainforest and woodland, increases in domesticated land, and species extinctions.”

“The global food supply relies heavily on fossil fuels. Before WW1, all agriculture was Organic. Following the invention of fossil fuel derived fertilisers and pesticides there were massive improvements in food production, allowing for increases in human population.The use of artificial fertilisers has fed far more people than would have been possible with organic agriculture alone.”

Documentary:

If you feel hopeless, don’t worry. I felt the same right after it. It seems that there is nothing that can be done about our problem with energy. I liked that the documentary did point out flaws in renewable energy. That side of the argument is almost never talked about. One thing though, I don’t think the suggestion at the end of the documentary will really do anything. People are always looking for cheapest and most convenient products. It’s just an economic principal. Independent farmers will have an extremely hard time finding costumers and looking for cheap ways to export. Also, have you seen a farmer’s market? Not the cheapest thing in the world, although the products are great because they weren’t mass produced. It’s a tough balance.

In terms of economics, I think governments should give incentives to be more eco-friendly in its processes. The less eco-friendly thing is the cheapest way/the way we’ve been doing it for decades; it goes back to what I said before.

I truly think our problem stems from overpopulation. We simply have way too many people. The sad thing is, I think that the concept of “Finite Capacity” is starting to take effect in some areas even though it doesn’t have to. I think we just need to keep looking. It’s interesting talking about this now, at lunch today, I was talking to my friends about how I don’t understand how a baseball player can be paid $30 million dollars and not contribute to society/world at all, but someone who is changing lives and the course of human progress barely makes anything. It actually enrages me. I think if we funded science more that we would be steps closer to figuring out how to solve this energy problem.

Advertisements

Drop the Base

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s