Scientists Shocked As Fisheries Collapse On West Coast: "It's The Worst We've Seen"

Tyler Durden's picture

Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

The Gulf of Alaska cod populations appears to have taken a nose-dive. Scientists are shocked at the collapse and starving fish, making this  the “worst they’ve ever seen.”

“They [Alaskan cod] get weak and die or get eaten by something else,” said NOAA’s Steve Barbeaux.

The 2017 trawl net survey found the lowest numbers of cod on record forcing scientists to try to unravel what happened. A lot of the cod hatched in 2012 appeared to survive, but by 2017, those fish were largely gone for the surveys, which also found scant evidence of fish born in subsequent years. Many of the cod that have come on board trawlers are “long skinny fish” according to Brent Paine, executive director of United Catcher Boats.

“This is a big deal,” Paine said. “We just don’t see these (cod) year classes disappear from one year to the next.”

The decline is expected to substantially reduce the gulf cod harvests that in recent years have been worth — before processing — more than $50 million to Northwest and Alaska fishermen who catch them with nets, pot traps, and baited hooks set along the sea bottom.

Barbeaux says the warm water, which has spread to depths of more than 1,000 feet, hit the cod like a kind of a double-whammy. Higher temperatures sped up the rate at which young cod burned calories while reducing the food available for the cod to consume. And many are blaming “climate change” for the effects on the fish, although scientists aren’t directly correlating the two events. “They get weak and die or get eaten by something else,” said Barbeaux, who in October presented preliminary survey findings to scientists and industry officials at an Anchorage meeting of the North Pacific Fishery Management Council.

The 2017 trawl net survey found the lowest numbers of cod on record, more than 70 percent lower than the survey found two years earlier.

 

Barbeaux said the cod decline likely resulted from the blob, a huge influx of warm Pacific Ocean water that stretched — during its 2015 peak — from the Gulf of Alaska to California’s offshore waters.

 

Biologists tracked increases in bird die-offs, whale strandings, and other events such as toxic algae blooms.

 

Even today, its effects appear to linger, such as in the dismal survey results for salmon last summer off Washington and Oregon.

The Olympian

The blob began to take hold in 2014, and within a year had raised temperatures as much as 7 degrees Fahrenheit in some surface waters of the Gulf of Alaska. In deeper waters, where cod feed, the temperature rose by more than 1 degree Fahrenheit. The surface temperatures recorded during the blob’s peak could be close to the average at century’s end, according to a recent report on climate change by the U.S. Global Change Research Program. Thus, future blobs could push temperatures much higher than the most recent event.

“They may not necessarily be more frequent, but they will be more intense,” said Nicholas Bond, a University of Washington climate scientist who assisted in the Gulf of Alaska cod research. “This is really going to be uncharted territory.”

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Laowei Gweilo's picture

study looks at population levels for a fish that's been in a sea for 1000s of years

uses 33 years data sample to draw conclusions 

Mr. Universe's picture

Dungeness Crab season delayed again this year, unsafe to eat. Coral bleaching from warming Oceans is a cause for concern. While it may just be part of the natural cycles of the planet, if the Oceans can't feed people, a billion will die.

Automatic Choke's picture

Past history shows that they always blame somebody else (climate change, oil refineries, astrology...), but in the end turns out it was overfishing. 

ACP's picture

Since California is the largest consumer of energy in the US, all electricity and fossil fuel use should be eliminated in the state.

It's for the fish, right?

la0508's picture

Nobody's mentioned Fukushima. Where does THAT fit in??

wildbad's picture

That fish he's holding in the pic is a "Ling Cod".

I was skiffman in a seine operation in the '80s. I often dropped a line over the side while "holding hook" for salmon for my lunch.

Ling was one of the tastiest fish I've ever eaten and I'm a Cape Cod boy.

We fishermen devastated the populations of herring, salmon of all types, Halibut etc. despite severy controls by the dept of fish and game. Since then the technology has made the fleets so efficient that they know where alll of the great pelagic schools are and when they will show up on the coast again.

The biggest threat to alll fisheries, if we discount the fact that the oceans are dying, is the expansion of international fleets and international consumption of what used to be a coastal food source.

Fleets of japanese off the coasts of africa remove the livlihoods of peoples who have fished since before time. They all watch TV on their IPhomes and want to eat fish from a €uropean frozen food aisle instead of fresh from the beach.

We need a serious EMP burst.

Downrange's picture

And you would be wrong, that is a true cod, not a ling cod

Slack Jack's picture

Record-Setting Hurricanes; Record temperatures; Record-Setting Wildfires; ya think it might be global warming?

THE EVIDENCE OF GLOBAL WARMING IS OVERWHELMING.

So, why is the global rise in temperatures so worrisome?

For one thing, as temperatures rise good farmland will become desert (e.g., dust-bowl conditions will probably return to the American Midwest).

Another major problem is sea-level rise.

Have a look at http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs2-00/

The U.S. Geological Survey people claim that;

The Greenland ice sheet melting will raise sea-level 6.55 meters (21.5 feet),
the West Antarctica ice sheet melting will raise sea-level 8.06 meters (26.4 feet),
the East Antarctica ice sheet melting will raise sea-level 64.8 meters (212.6 feet),
and all other ice melting will raise sea-level 0.91 meters (3 feet).

For a grand total of about 80 meters (263 feet).

So, what does an 80 meter (263 feet) rise in sea-level mean. Have a look at the following map of the world after an 80 meter rise. It means that over one billion people will have to be resettled to higher ground and that much of the most productive agricultural land will be under water. Fortunately, at current rates, the Greenland ice sheet will take over a thousand years to melt and the Antarctica ice sheet, much longer. However, the greater the temperature rise the faster the ice sheets will melt, bringing the problem much closer. Remember, the huge ice sheet that recently covered much of North America, almost completely melted in only 15,000 years (today, only the Greenland ice sheet, and some other small patches of it, remain). Since then (15,000 years ago), sea-levels have risen about 125 meters (410 feet), only 80 meters to go.

The ice sheets have been continuously melting for thousands of years. What is left of them today, is still melting, and will continue to melt. Human caused global warning will cause this remnant to melt significantly faster. This is a big, big, problem.

For HUGE detailed maps of the "World after the Melt" go to:

http://preearth.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=23

Global temperatures are increasing. And by quite a lot each year.

2016 is the hottest year on record for global temperatures.

This is 0.0380 degrees centigrade hotter than the previous record year which was 2015.

0.0380 is a large increase in just one year.

2015 was the hottest year (at that time) for global temperatures.

This was 0.1601 degrees hotter than the previous record year which was 2014.

0.1601 is an absolutely huge increase in just one year (at this rate temperatures would increase by 16 degrees in a century).

2014 was the hottest year (at that time) for global temperatures.

This was 0.0402 degrees hotter than the previous record year which was 2010.

http://preearth.net/images/temp-anomalies-1880-2017.txt

The conspiracy to hide global warming data.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is given tax money to make global temperature records available to the public. However, certain people at NOAA continually sabotage this aspect of NOAA's mandate. For example, these people have (deliberately) sabotaged the web-page that delivers the temperature records.

Look for yourself:

Go to the page: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/faq/anomalies.php scroll down to the The Global Anomalies and Index Data section and click the download button and see what happens. Well, you get the message:

"Not Found. The requested URL /monitoring-references/faq/anomalies-download was not found on this server."

I guess that the 2017 data must be truly horrible if they have to hide it away.

http://preearth.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=23

Refuse-Resist's picture

So answer me this:

What impact has indiscriminate feeding of Africans had on the environment?

What effects will it ihave by 2100? When there are 4 BILLION of them?

Sure nature runs in cylces. And species go extinct. Especially species that overshoot their resource base.

This is whaty is happening.

Even if tomorrow the USA turned off all sources of CO2 pollution it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference in the overall picture, because the 3rd world would merely pick up our slack and use the energy that we gave up. It's called Jevon's Paradox.

So hootin and hollerin abnout global warming is a waste of fucking time,

Humans, for a variety of reasons have overpopulated the planet, and some humans have resource stripped for maximum profit to the point that the biosphere is getting very close to where it won't support human life at all. And the industrial fishing continues.  And the pollution. The and non stop feeding of 70 IQ breeders.

In short no amount of USGOV invtervention will have any positive effect -- unless they decide to use nukes to tackle the overpopulation issue.

So you're just wasting your time. Your facts may be correct, but in this world of PROFITS UBER ALLES, it just doesn't matter.

 

pods's picture

My money's on the Asians, and not their handling of Fukushima. 

They overfish everything. So the US keeps poor records while the damn japs and chinks harvest like it's a race to the end. They are doing it all over the world too. 

Sharks all over the world are being slaughtered so the slopes can enjoy sharkfin soup. It's disgusting, and they have even bought off governments in central and South America too. 

pods

Steve Scuba's picture

I'm making over $15k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do...  http://disq.us/url?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.Jobzon3.com%3Ab8eR_DQLwGRPVGtFvv...

wise_owl_says...'s picture

do not reply to 'slack crap' he is a troll. cutting, pasting and posting same drivel on just about every article pertaining to natual planet corrections. fisheries will starve and go bust long before fish populations are extinct.

Sirius Wonderblast's picture

I'm not a scientist, but I wonder - could additional heat in the atmosphere (if it is accepted that it is warmer) be from all the heat being emitted from transport, industry, homes etc etc? Not from gas in the atmosphere, but just actual radiant heat? That is to say, stop emitting heat and watch temperatures fall? You will, I am sure, have noticed how it is warmer in towns and cities than in the countryside, one only has to extrapolate to the global scale. I have a feeling that if there is global warming, and if mankinds' activities have a part to play (as opposed to solar activity, vulcanism etc), then then heat emitted may be much the greater factor.

Don't misunderstand, I am not in favour of polluting and I think on principle it should be eradicated so far as we possibly can on the very simple grounds that it is stupid to foul the nest for us or the rest of the flora and fauna on this planet, but I have always felt that the "greenhouse gas" proposition was likely to be an example of people who think themselves clever getting too clever by half. Me, I'm a simple country boy, hopefully not too simple. 

 

Sparkey's picture

Sorry but. You are dangerously simple, there is no cure for this, still, no one wiill notice if you don't comment on things that are beyond your capacity, I tell you this as a Friend.

Sirius Wonderblast's picture

Thank you for the insight into your own mental capacity.

I felt I had made clear I have no idea if what I was wondering had foundation or not, but given the amount of heat emitted it felt worth exploring. That is unlike bald assertion or theories presented as absolute fact on science which is allegedly dodgy, as has been the case with this whole topic. Unless you have access to source material, you are no better informed than I am. Clear enough for you? Or are you simply committed to shitting on yours and everyone else's doorstep?

Big Creek Rising's picture

Slacker: you are a fucking idiot.

Automatic Choke's picture

Slack Jack - one question:

How do you reconcile the Vostok ice cores?   Those thousands of years of ice core record, that Al Gore showed with a monster power-point, have a 600-800 year phase lag.   The temperature changes precede the CO2 changes throughout the record.   This is not in dispute.  This was even known when Al made his film, but he left it out because it was inconvenient.

So -- how do you reconcile that?   You can't ignore it - you are here promoting this nonsense every opportunity.  You must believe, so what lets you ignore such a crucial piece of information?

Black Warrior Waterdog's picture

Yep - you can tell by the chin barbel.

Moski's picture

caught a ling cod as long as my leg outside of Gig Harbor, WA...yum!

Bwana's picture

Alaska took a different position years ago. All of the fisheries are monitored. The fishermen get to fish for salmon when there has been enough escapement to father a new generation of salmon at every stream system. All of the fishing is controlled and only allowed commercially when the biomass of a particular fish is adequate to put forth an adequate number of eggs or fry to continue the species at a level that sustains the fishery.

This article is a deceptive ruse to take the heat off TEPCO for the Fukushia tripple meltdown that has virtually killed 90% of the life in the North Pacific Ocean.

gaoptimize's picture

The collapse of fisheries around the world is due to a lack of mixing that would keep iron near the surface.  Please see how Russ George put some iron in the water in Western Canada and the Alaskan salmon harvest boomed in 2013.  http://russgeorge.net

J S Bach's picture

Pretty soon we'll be reading...

“They [Japanese people] get weak and die or get eaten by something else.”

Fukashima's after effects will take decades to be fully seen.

... crumbs's picture

russ george is a joke

pretty interesting

 

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/view.php?id=89021

Iron in the Wind : Natural Hazards - NASA
earthobservatory.nasa.gov
When winds push dust and glacial flour into the Gulf of Alaska, they can deliver enough iron to trigger phytoplankton blooms.

unlike this stupid foible
https://www.google.ca/search?q=haida+iron+seeding&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_...

 

hard to outdo mother nature

hannah's picture

this effect occurs every few decades so it cant be 'global warming'....but i am sure the gov wants a new tax just in case. it is simply over fishing as previously stated.

mkkby's picture

La Nina made 2017 weather very warm and rainy in the north pacific. But political hacks want to blame CO2 for everything.

Did the fish die off, or did they just move to colder waters? Nobody knows I presume, but some are quick to blame their pet narrative.

Time to extend the territorial waters a lot further out. Keep those damn japanese fishing boats the hell out. They have never cared if they took too many and destroyed the ability of the fish to produce offspring.

JohninMK's picture

In the North Sea the cod slowly move north up the Norwegian coast when the sea warms. This allows other types of fish that prefer warmer water to take their place. I assume this happens in the Pacific too.

Sirius Wonderblast's picture

They like killing whales too, which I for one oppose.

ZD1's picture

"The blob began to take hold in 2014, and within a year had raised temperatures as much as 7 degrees Fahrenheit in some surface waters of the Gulf of Alaska."

Undersea volcanoes? 


Lore's picture

YES!  That's exactly what I was about to post.  There's been major undersea volcanism in the Ring of Fire, and none of it is being watched, but the resultant change in temperature is well known by natives as a key influence on migration and spawning of fish stocks, among other things (e.g., seawater mineralization, tidal algae blooms, WEATHER). 

In this context, well-run fish farms should be APPRECIATED, not ideologically / stupidly repudiated. 

... crumbs's picture

yo

 

"well-run fish farms should be APPRECIATED"

 

NO SUCH THING as a "well run" fish farm !

 

for a million reasons

HRClinton's picture

Fukushima might be a contributing factor, but you can bet a fishburger, that the dominant factor of a Pareto of causes, is Chinese pollution and Asian over-fishing.

Lore's picture

Overfishing is a problem.  ZHers should watch video of the massive canning trawlers for a real eye-opener. 

Factory Ship wiki

Pareto wiki

Poor fisheries are like bad crops:  there are countless excuses, there are legitimate reasons, and then there are the MAIN reasons. 

pods's picture

Yep, the asain's are methodical in their decimation of any fish stock they target. 

They just DGAF. 

pods

Troy Ounce's picture

The narrative of fear and control, continues.

Arctic Ocean Warming, Icebergs Growing Scarce, Washington Post Reports:

"The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot," according to a Commerce Department report published by the Washington Post. Writes the Post:
"Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers. . . all point to a
radical change in climate conditions and . . . unheard-of temperatures in
the Arctic zone . . . Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of
earth and stones . . . while at many points well-known glaciers have
entirely disappeared."

- Washington Post, published Nov. 2, 1922

"The climate of New-York and the contiguous Atlantic seaboard has long been a study of great interest. We have just experienced a remarkable instance of its peculiarity. The Hudson River, by a singular freak of temperature, has thrown off its icy mantle and opened its waters to navigation."

- New York Times, Jan. 2, 1870

"Is our climate changing? The succession of temperate summers and open winters through several years, culminating last winter in the almost total failure of the ice crop throughout the valley of the Hudson, makes the question pertinent. The older inhabitants tell us that the winters are not as cold now as when they were young, and we have all observed a marked diminution of the average cold even in this last decade."

- New York Times, June 23, 1890

"The question is again being discussed whether recent and long-continued
observations do not point to the advent of a second glacial period, when the countries now basking in the fostering warmth of a tropical sun will
ultimately give way to the perennial frost and snow of the polar regions."

- New York Times, Feb. 24, 1895

Professor Gregory of Yale University stated that "another world ice-epoch is
due." He was the American representative to the Pan-Pacific Science Congress and warned that North America would disappear as far south as the Great
Lakes, and huge parts of Asia and Europe would be "wiped out."

- Chicago Tribune, Aug. 9, 1923

"The discoveries of changes in the sun's heat and southward advance of
glaciers in recent years have given rise to the conjectures of the possible
advent of a new ice age"

- Time Magazine, Sept. 10, 1923

Headline: "America in Longest Warm Spell Since 1776; Temperature Line
Records a 25-year Rise" - New York Times, March 27, 1933

"America is believed by Weather Bureau scientists to be on the verge of a change of climate, with a return to increasing rains and deeper snows and the colder winters of grandfather's day."

- Associated Press, Dec. 15, 1934

Warming Arctic Climate Melting Glaciers Faster, Raising Ocean Level,
Scientist Says - "A mysterious warming of the climate is slowly manifesting
itself in the Arctic, engendering a "serious international problem," Dr.
Hans Ahlmann, noted Swedish geophysicist, said today.

- New York Times, May 30, 1937

"Greenland's polar climate has moderated so consistntly that communities of hunters have evolved into fishing villages. Sea mammals, vanishing from the west coast, have been replaced by codfish and other fish species in the area's southern waters."

- New York Times, Aug. 29, 1954

"An analysis of weather records from Little America shows a steady warming of climate over the last half century. The rise in average temperature at the Antarctic outpost has been about five degrees Fahrenheit."

- New York Times, May 31, 1958

"Several thousand scientists of many nations have recently been climbing
mountains, digging tunnels in glaciers, journeying to the Antarctic, camping
on floating Arctic ice. Their object has been to solve a fascinating riddle:
what is happening to the world's ice?

- New York Times, Dec. 7, 1958

"After a week of discussions on the causes of climate change, an assembly of specialists from several continents seems to have reached unanimous agreement on only one point: it is getting colder." - New York Times, Jan.
30, 1961

"Like an outrigger canoe riding before a huge comber, the earth with its
inhabitants is caught on the downslope of an immense climatic wave that is plunging us toward another Ice Age."

- Los Angeles Times, Dec. 23, 1962

"Col. Bernt Balchen, polar explorer and flier, is circulating a paper among
polar specialists proposing that the Arctic pack ice is thinning and that
the ocean at the North Pole may become an open sea within a decade or two."

- New York Times, Feb. 20, 1969

"By 1985, air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching
earth by one half ..."

- Life magazine, January 1970

"In ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large
areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead fish."

- Paul Ehrlich, Earth Day, 1970

"Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is
taken against problems facing mankind. We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation."

- Barry Commoner (Washington University), Earth Day, 1970

Because of increased dust, cloud cover and water vapor, "the planet will
cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born."

- Newsweek magazine, Jan. 26, 1970

"The United States and the Soviet Union are mounting large-scale
investigations to determine why the Arctic climate is becoming more frigid,
why parts of the Arctic sea ice have recently become ominously thicker and whether the extent of that ice cover contributes to the onset of ice ages."

- New York Times, July 18, 1970

"In the next 50 years, fine dust that humans discharge into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuel will screen out so much of the sun's rays that the Earth's average temperature could fall by six degrees. Sustained emissions over five to 10 years, could be sufficient to trigger an ice age."

- Washington Post, July 9, 1971

"It's already getting colder. Some midsummer day, perhaps not too far in the future, a hard, killing frost will sweep down on the wheat fields of
Saskatchewan, the Dakotas and the Russian steppes. . . ." - Los Angles
Times, Oct. 24, 1971

"An international team of specialists has concluded from eight indexes of
climate that there is no end in sight to the cooling trend of the last 30 years, at least in the Northern Hemisphere."

- New York Times, Jan. 5, 1978

"A poll of climate specialists in seven countries has found a consensus that
there will be no catastrophic changes in the climate by the end of the
century. But the specialists were almost equally divided on whether there would be a warming, a cooling or no change at all."

- New York Times, Feb. 18, 1978

"A global warming trend could bring heat waves, dust-dry farmland and
disease, the experts said. Under this scenario, the resort town of Ocean
City, Md., will lose 39 feet of shoreline by 2000 and a total of 85 feet
within the next 25 years."

- San Jose Mercury News, June 11, 1986

"Global warming could force Americans to build 86 more power plants-at a cost of $110 billion-to keep all their air conditioners running 20 years from now, a new study says...Using computer models, researchers concluded that global warming would raise average annual temperatures nationwide two degrees by 2010, and the drain on power would require the building of 86 new midsize power plants

- Associated Press, May 15, 1989

"New York will probably be like Florida 15 years from now."

-St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Sept. 17, 1989

"[By] 1995, the greenhouse effect would be desolating the heartlands of
North America and Eurasia with horrific drought, causing crop failures and food riots . . . [By 1996] The Platte River of Nebraska would be dry, while
a continent-wide black blizzard of prairie topsoil will stop traffic on
interstates, strip paint from houses and shut down computers . . . The
Mexican police will round up illegal American migrants surging into Mexico
seeking work as field hands."

- "Dead Heat: The Race Against the Greenhouse Effect," Michael Oppenheimer
and Robert H. Boyle, 1990.

"It appears that we have a very good case for suggesting that the El Ninos
are going to become more frequent, and they're going to become more intense and in a few years, or a decade or so, we'll go into a permanent El Nino. So instead of having cool water periods for a year or two, we'll have El Nino upon El Nino, and that will become the norm. And you'll have an El Nino, that instead of lasting 18 months, lasts 18 years," according to Dr. Russ Schnell, a scientist doing atmospheric research at Mauna Loa Observatory.

- BBC, Nov. 7, 1997 (followed immediately in late 1998 by three straight years of La Nina)

"Scientists are warning that some of the Himalayan glaciers could vanish
within ten years because of global warming. A build-up of greenhouse gases is blamed for the meltdown, which could lead to drought and flooding in the region affecting millions of people."

-The Birmingham Post in England, July 26, 1999

"This year (2007) is likely to be the warmest year on record globally,
beating the current record set in 1998."

- ScienceDaily, Jan. 5, 2007

Arctic warming has become so dramatic that the North Pole may melt this summer (2008), report scientists studying the effects of climate change in the field. "We're actually projecting this year that the North Pole may be
free of ice for the first time [in history]," David Barber, of the University of Manitoba, told National Geographic News aboard the C.C.G.S.
Amundsen, a Canadian research icebreaker.

- National Geographic News, June 20, 2008

"So the climate will continue to change, even if we make maximum effort to slow the growth of carbon dioxide. Arctic sea ice will melt away in the summer season within the next few decades. Mountain glaciers, providing fresh water for rivers that supply hundreds of millions of people, will disappear - practically all of the glaciers could be gone within 50 years. Clearly, if we burn all fossil fuels, we will destroy the planet we know .

. . We would set the planet on a course to the ice-free state, with sea
level 75 metres higher. Climatic disasters would occur continually."

- Dr. James Hansen (NASA GISS), The Observer, Feb. 15, 2009.

wise_owl_says...'s picture

Scientists, Experts, Climatologists, Al Gore and whole institutionalized Wasting-tons, D.eceiptful C.ollective agenda bankster payrolled gangsters were right. i should have listened and taken heed. ;-) here notating my last blog to anyone that may be out there, very likely all have been decimated by climatic impact (caused by mining algorithm difficulty) and spending last wage earned on carbon tax. wow, mother nature is pissed, pinched between fire and ice. That would make climate predictions correct 50% of time. Difficult picking this binary option... Fire / Ice. come to think of it, hasn't humanity been walking a very 'thin' earth surface line since beginning of time? heavenly space vacuum ice above and hellish fire magma below, with just a couple km separation? wishful thinking, trolls still coming through here on zerphedge.

 

wise owl, zerphedge, december 31st 2020.

Sparkey's picture

This is great work Troy, thank You, if we could just shrink the population to 100,000, say 1000 owners and 99,000 workers then the owners could use all the energy they wanted and the workers could have just enough to keep them alive and we all could life happily everafter!

Moski's picture

Now that is public service...thank you.

waspwench's picture

Meanwhile, the elephant in the room is ignored. 

If overpopulation is not addressed by the world community it will continue to degrade the environment until a crisis is reached, at which point the problem will solve itself, but with unimagined suffering.

... crumbs's picture

add this to yer list

 

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2010/jun/20/ice-age-cannibals-britai...

 

"Britain's icy desolation ended abruptly 14,700 years ago when there was a dramatic leap in temperatures across the globe according to ice-cores found in Greenland and lake sediments in Germany. In less than three years, temperatures had soared by around 6 to 7 degrees Celsius and ice sheets began a rapid retreat throughout the world."

 

yes that's 6 to 7 degrees in LESS THAN THREE YEARS - and before the bullshit of AL GORE

DaiRR's picture

Haven't read it but the obious concern of hurricanes, typhoons and just regular old gales can and will destroy civilizations floating / bobbing in the oceans.

Blue Steel 309's picture

Coral bleaching from warming oceans is a fucking myth, and why I have no respect for "biologists" (though, technically, I am one).