Ecological message to all American citizens

[gate7ole]

According to some numbers that an international organization recently published, the Americans use 12100 KW per year, while Europeans use less than half. Also, the average yearly need of gas per person is 1740 lt, in contract to the 530 lts needed by the Europeans. The numbers for the use of water is 290 lts and 130 lts respectively.
Finally, while North America is about 5% of the world population, it spends 25% of the power produced.
Now, these numbers speak for themselves. We’re talking about double waste of resources. And mark that the comparison is between USA and Europe, not USA and Africa or Asia. There the differences are vast. And what does the American president do for this situation? He schedules the construction of 1300 new industrial units the next 20 years.
With the Johansburg summit very recent, it is very hypocritical not to blame the real responsibles. While Europe signs treaties to remove freon from airconditions, to decrease the use of gas, USA just doesn’t care. They don’t care if the rest of the world is burning, so that they can be kept cool. Or that water reserves are low so that they can all maintain their swimming pools.
I believe that all you Tolkien fans are not like the rest. We have understood the ecological messages of Tolkien’s work and cannot stay passive. I urge all Americans who disapprove of this situation, to start their “revolution” by not wasting power resources, not using the air-conditioning all day and resisting to the lavish government.
Of course the same goes to the Europeans, who have showed some ecological consciousness and must continue to do so.

[My_Precious]

I've heard about all those statistics in my Chemistry class.
People generally just don't care. They would make a big deal of walking 30 feet from one store to the other, and circle for 10-15 minutes looking for a free parking space near the entrance instead of parking in the back and walking 1 minute to the store, but they wouldn't care about what's happening outside of their car. That's just my opinion.

[Mindy_O_Lluin]

All true Gate7ole. It is quite shameful. Unfortunately, complacency is a hard mode from which to escape. I wish you could tell us how to change this. We tend to take the path of least resistance, and when it comes to giving up our creature comforts, you are asking a lot. I remember seeing a cartoon in 70's after one of the gas crunches we had. It was of a couple driving a big Cadillac of a car labelled "Gas Hog" and saying, "Why should I get an economy car, I can afford to waste gas."
Well, in theory, I do not agree with such an attitude. in reality, I, like everyone else, am swept up in the flow of what is readily available to us. The hard question is, HOW TO RETRAIN US ALL TO ACCEPT LESS than what we already have. Americans can't even cope with the idea of leveling off, or sustainability. The U.S. is all hyped about needing a fast growing economy instead of stopping with 'enough'. Stock Market returns suck people into the wave of riches. But, those people don't think or care about the downsizing and 'half-ing' of the laid off peoples lifestyles, which is a direct result of their easy money. They mouth off speeches of the American dream and getting rich as a way to pull everyone up, but in reality, our standard of living for the bottom 70% (estimate) is decreasing and the gap between rich and poor is widening.
You may be right that a revolution is the only thing that will knock us back down to rational levels, and the Muslim's dislike of us and attacks on us, should be telling us to be introspective and take a hard look at what we are doing - taking so much more than our fair share. But instead, they keep right on. The stock market tries to go to equilibrium in the 80's? Reagan props it up with false money. Corporations do evil larceny crimes and CEO's get $10 million starting pay? Slap 'em on the wrist and focus on getting our foot into the middle east oil fields. Open up world markets to free trade? Corporations will just move offshore so they don't have to pay their fair share of taxes and just let the rest of us little guys cover that load.
So. How do we make such a turnabout. It should be a question of: How do we stop a runaway train with momentum that no individual can halt.
Let me know.

[Gamil Zirak]

Here's a shocker for you, who cares!!! No really, who cares!!! We have the financial means to produce and consume it. Would you like us to bottle up the energy we are "wasting" (mind you the fact that we have some of the hottest and coldest temperatures through out the year) and send it accross the ocean to someone who is burning up? It doesn't work that way. If you want something good, you have to work hard for it. Plain and simple.

Here's an article from CNN about the Earth heating up regardless of the so called "greenhouse" gasses: http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/09/20/climate.change.reut/index.html These gasses don't heat up the earth. The billions of people inhabiting it produces body heat of 98.1 degrees farenheit do.

[gate7ole]

If you don’t care, then why I should bother convince you?
Only one thing: Times change and you will not be always the strongest country. When this happens, when you don’t…

have the financial means to produce and consume it.

when other countries spoil the planet you live, then you will have NO RIGHT TO COMPLAIN.
Tolkien didn’t teach us anything about ecology after all. It’s all a bunch of tales and battles.
Ah, and your arguments are very funny

[Rangerdave]

Alterative means.

I truly believe that the general public would support alternative means of transportation if Local planners would pull their heads out of their fourth point of contact.

Take Houston for example. The local city planners decided that Houston should have a light rail system. That sounds like a good idea right? But did these people design a rail system that would link major business centers with major residentual centers? No! These goobers decided that they would link city hall with the football stadium following a route that is only known for liquor stores and prostitution. Now that makes loads of sense.

Seatle is another fine example. they have a beautiful monorail that does nothing but circle tourist attractions.

If we want to inspire people to use alternative transportation, we have to make it not only energy efficent, but convienent to the general population as well.

end of rant
RD

[Tar-Elenion]

Originally posted by gate7ole
[B]According to some numbers that an international organization recently published, the Americans use 12100 KW per year, while Europeans use less than half. Also, the average yearly need of gas per person is 1740 lt, in contract to the 530 lts needed by the Europeans. The numbers for the use of water is 290 lts and 130 lts respectively.
Finally, while North America is about 5% of the world population, it spends 25% of the power produced.

How large are most European countries compared to America?
What is a long distance to travel in Europe?
What is the avearge per gallon price of gas in Europe?
Which country produces the most goods and services?
What percent of the world economy is the United States?


Now, these numbers speak for themselves. We’re talking about double waste of resources.

The numbers only speak for themeslves in isolation. Look at them in a greater context.


And mark that the comparison is between USA and Europe, not USA and Africa or Asia. There the differences are vast.

Do you like running water, flush toilets, colour TV, electricty, your computer etc?
Or would you prefer to live in Zaire or Cambodia etc?


With the Johansburg summit very recent, it is very hypocritical not to blame the real responsibles.

Have you read what the delegates to the summit were eating and drinking?

[Gloer]

1. Why is it so hard for Americans to admit that their lifestyle is much more wasteful than the european one.

2. And what difference does it make if Europeans waste only half of the amount americans do?

3. Compared to the average, the difference is enormous.

[Gloer]

Originally posted by Tar-Elenion



Do you like running water, flush toilets, colour TV, electricty, your computer etc?
Or would you prefer to live in Zaire or Cambodia etc?



Great!

You have just descibed the things we do not want in the ultimate h e a v e n of the nordic vacationer: the summer cottage at the lakeside or on the fells.

Europeans like it very simple. Being in the middle of uncultivated wilderness is luxorious life and a complite antidote to the mall.
Modern lifestyle is something we accept only because it gives us more time to do our job more efficiently. The free time is better used not consuming.

[Rangerdave]

One thing that always irked me about the stats is how they arrive at them.

To compute material and energy consumption the take the total consumption of the nation and divide it the citizenry. Sounds fair on the onset, but this does not take into account the corporate consumption of material. nor does it account for the export of mateial. I would wager that a solid 50% of all energy usage in Texas is used by a combination of NASA and the petrochemical industry, possiblely more. Also, countries like say Argentina produce vast amounts of oil but use very little. this makes their averages seem very good. but let me tell you, the ones who can afford cars and other consumer goods use them just as wastefully as Americans do.

Plus the disantces traveled by Americans living outside the Atlantic are quite large. I for instance commute 35 miles each way to work. Thats 70 miles a day. Why, because there is no convient way for me to do otherwise. I tried the bus and it took over five hours to travel that distance and cost me more in transfers than what I would have paid in gas.

So if you are going to point blame at America, point it where in belongs. and Industry rather than the population.

RD

[Gloer]

"The forest is in fire not the trees."
How does that sound. Pretty smart?

USA is a country that haas foreign trade deficit. That means USA imports more than exports. To satisfy american demand not only the american industry is employed but also others.

And I agree that if one can afford something one is more likely to spend.

But I do not agree at all that one would spend like americans do. It is simply not possible. Compared to USA all other cultures differ to less materialistic direction. There are degrees but name just one culture that is so dominantly valueing material goods and services as the goal of our efforts in life.

PS. It is amusing how americans tend to think that others do not see the point in consuming only because they can not afford it. :D
I best enjoy having the potential for something and then saving my money. Is this incomprehensible for americans?

PPS. In other occasions I like to point out to many people here in Finland that claim they can not afford the same life style that they could in Texas doing the same job. They complain about the income taxes. What I tell them is to consider comparing that 70 miles a day commuting, buying four cheap cars instead of one with 100% tax and a house and an insurance compared to a a half a million worth flat in down-town and a train to work. They should just complain about taxes on gas and cars, not income tax. It is deliberate political choice to tax/not to tax private car ownership. Cost increased by taxation create denser populated cities, working public transport and expensive flats. On the otherhand no-tax creates huge areas of suburban sprawl, families with one car-per-head and traffic jams. In the end both get a miserable life, but the commuter burns more oil.

[gate7ole]

To Tar-Elenion:
So, you say that gas is needed in greater quantities in America. And what about water or electricity? Do you need more water too? No, my friend, these are signs of a greedy way of life. Trying to excuse yourself is hypocritical. Many europeans, too have to drive a long distance every day. They can also waste power in needless activities. But they don’t because they have the sense of ecology.
I see that you don’t have it.

Do you like running water, flush toilets, colour TV, electricty, your computer etc?
Or would you prefer to live in Zaire or Cambodia etc?

I do like my TV and my computer, but believe those are unimportant when considering power usage. And no, you don’t have to live in Zaire, there are many intermediate countries.
I believe it is not your fault. It is the government’s fault that brainwash you to waste more and more greedily. Some of you may resist, but most of you (including probably Tar-Elenion) don’t. Of course I blame the government and the Industry, but a question arises. Why doesn’t it happen to Europe? Why aren’t we convinced by our governments to spend more? Because of the different culture. Your society, being young and therefore immature, is interested in the body. Ours in the mind. And that is a fact. Whatever powerful economy you have, you’ll be way back in culture.
And at last we agree to something

Have you read what the delegates to the summit were eating and drinking?

Of course, all (with a few exceptions) those delegates are nothing more than a bunch of, manipulated by industries, politics who pressed by people “try” to take some measures.

[Parrot]

Finally, while North America is about 5% of the world population, it spends 25% of the power produced.
Now, these numbers speak for themselves. We’re talking about double waste of resources.
I do like my TV and my computer, but believe those are unimportant when considering power usage.
Lies, damnable lies, and statistics (or something like that, sorry Mark). Numbers do not speak for themselves. To go along with the point RangerDave was making, your TV and computer do not just materialize from a vaccuum. Some business GATHERS (mines, produces) the raw materials to make these goods, most likely sells and then SHIPS these materials to another company that MANUFACTURES these goods, who then, in turn, sell and SHIP these goods to another company that then sell and SHIP these goods either to retailers or end users. All the processes along this cycle require vast amounts of energy to bring your TV and Computer to your front door. If you are going to go throwing stones at the US (and Japan, where are the numbers on Japan? most Japanes live very simply but I'll bet they consume a lot of power) for our power consumption, you better be prepared to defend throwing the baby out with the bath water. Americans do waste more energy that other cultures, granted, and there have been some reasonable points made here towards that end, but if you think your culpability begins and ends with the small amount of energy used by your TV and computer you best pull your head out of the sand and look at the whole picture. Do you have any idea of the amount of power consumed by the server farms that drive this internet we all know and love?
There are degrees but name just one culture that is so dominantly valueing material goods and services as the goal of our efforts in life.
Good to see Gloer's insight in to the American psyche is as penetrating as ever. :rolleyes:

[Gamil Zirak]

Hmm. Where to start. Let's say that us consuming Americans stop consuming everything we export. Who's going to take our place and buy everything that we are? What impact will that have on a country when their exports are cut in half or 70%. Can you say bankrupt? We also feed most of the nation. The last time I checked you needed water (which is a replenishalbe resource) to do that. So if we stop using all of that water we produce less crops. If we produce less crops, more people are starving. That's a really good idea. I think I'll write my congressman on that one. Come on people. Quit being jealous of the life we live and get the timber out of your own eye before you pick at the splinter in ours.

[Parrot]

Posted by gate7ole
Your society, being young and therefore immature, is interested in the body. Ours in the mind. And that is a fact.
Posted by Gloer
PS. It is amusing how americans tend to think that others do not see the point in consuming only because they can not afford it.
Almost as amusing as this conveniently large brush with which you paint all Americans. It occurs to me that if statements along these lines were aimed at any other nationality or race they would be summarily dismissed as blatantly ignorant stereotypes, but since the target is only America we can pass it off as reasonable debate. Actually, I should probably just shut my mouth and let you keep spewing this hyperbolic pablum and continue to clearly demonstrate that this thread is much more about bashing America than furthering any kind of valid ecological message.

[Walter]

*opens mouth .... takes a deep breath .... shuts up again .... shrugs and goes off*

[Parrot]

Come on Walt, you can say it.....

[Walter]

parrot, no I'd rather not - these discussions get me going, I'm an environmentalist at heart...

[Gamil Zirak]

Originally posted by Walter
I'm an environmentalist by heart...
It's really not your fault Walter. I'd blame the proper authorities on that one.:D

Now seriously, as long as your not the wacko kind (i.e. blows up a house to keep it from being built and harming the environment yet harming the environment in the process) that's fine by me.

[gate7ole]

Those anti-American statements were not the issue here. It was not my intention but I guess Gamil Zirak’s maddening post made me lose my temper.
The point is that we all have to respect the demand of other people to live in a healthier planet. Most Europeans countries take measures against pollution by setting strict bounds to industries, forbidding the use of freon, scheduling to reduce the usage of electricity/water/gas through the years. Europe too is a consuming continent. But at least most people, along with some politicians feel the responsibility to act against this greedy way of life. USA doesn’t show such intention. On the contrary, they schedule more and more power plants. If the matter concerned them, I wouldn’t mind at all if you consume ten times more power. But it is a global situation and your actions endanger our home.
And then Gamil Zirak continues the outrageous statements

Let's say that us consuming Americans stop consuming everything we export. Who's going to take our place and buy everything that we are? What impact will that have on a country when their exports are cut in half or 70%. Can you say bankrupt? We also feed most of the nation.

So, you are our saviours. You buy our exports to avoid bankruptcy. Thanks a lot.
But what about WHO created this unstable economic situation where every other nation depends on USA to survive? Who has the last 50 years driven the world economy to a situation that they will control every export? You created a dead-end for us, and now you say that you are our saviour who buy our products. Now this is called hypocrisy. It may be good for your country but don’t expect us to thank you.
(This had nothing to do with the subject but Gamil Zirak is very annoying and must be answered.)

[Gamil Zirak]

Feel free to call me whatever you'd like. I don't stoop to that level, but you can.
Most Europeans countries take measures against pollution by setting strict bounds to industries, forbidding the use of freon, scheduling to reduce the usage of electricity/water/gas through the years. Europe too is a consuming continent. But at least most people, along with some politicians feel the responsibility to act against this greedy way of life.
Most our all? You accuse the USA (one country) of not doing its part and say that most European countries do theirs. Why aren't the other European countries fixing their problems? Do you think that American industries don't have to answer to the Environmental Protection Agency? They have standards and regulations as well. I would love to see more nuclear power plants added to replace the cole burning ones we have now, but the same people that want us to reduce our "air polution" are telling us not to use cleaner means to produce energy. Did you know that in California they won't allow windmill turbins to be built to produce clean and efficient energy because it's an eye sore. These are the same people that think that we are poluting to much with the current power plants. Speak out of one side of the mouth not both.
USA doesn’t show such intention. On the contrary, they schedule more and more power plants. If the matter concerned them, I wouldn’t mind at all if you consume ten times more power. But it is a global situation and your actions endanger our home.
Most of this is covered in the above paragraph, but I would like to no how our consumption is impacting the rest of the world? We have the lowest amount of polution of any country.
So, you are our saviours. You buy our exports to avoid bankruptcy
I think you misunderstood me here. If we stop buying everything that we consume, you have a mass amount of surplus in the global market. The supply now exceeds demand and the prices drop dramatically. With the descrease in price goes profit. So the sellers (every other country besides the USA) is no longer making a better than normal profit (if any profit at all). Now you have a bunch of companies in almost every industry that can no longer keep their doors open. They close down causing massive layoffs and it becomes a dominoe affect in to almost every industry (except for the reposession industry, they thrive in this).You created a dead-end for us, and now you say that you are our saviour who buy our products. Now this is called hypocrisy. It may be good for your country but don’t expect us to thank you.
We created a dead end? I believe the downward economy all started in Japan when they had to lower their interest rates to almost zero percent (where they are still at today).

[Parrot]

But what about WHO created this unstable economic situation where every other nation depends on USA to survive? Who has the last 50 years driven the world economy to a situation that they will control every export? You created a dead-end for us, and now you say that you are our saviour who buy our products. Now this is called hypocrisy.
Yes, we did exactly this and the rest of the world, the unsuspecting victims of our Dr. Evilesque grand design, led blindly to the slaughter, share no blame. Just like the little power your computer uses has no connection to the new power plants being built to fuel the technological explosion. You want to hear the tune but someone else can pay the piper. You're right about one thing; Hypocrisy is exactly what this is called.

[Gamil Zirak]

Originally posted by gate7ole
According to some numbers that an international organization recently published, the Americans use 12100 KW per year, while Europeans use less than half. Also, the average yearly need of gas per person is 1740 lt, in contract to the 530 lts needed by the Europeans. The numbers for the use of water is 290 lts and 130 lts respectively.
Finally, while North America is about 5% of the world population, it spends 25% of the power produced.
I don't know why I didn't point this out earlier, but oh well. What organization published this and where did they publish it. I'd like to take a look at their figures.

When you say North America spends about 25% of the power produced to you mean that we produce 25% of the power. Last time I checked, we don't buy power from any other country.

On the gas consumption per person, North America is a bigger continent than Europe. USA alone you can drive miles and miles without having to stopp and cross the border of another country. My point being that we have more miles to drive on. Everything is spread out so we have to drive further. People in California and New Jerser commute at least 100 miles round trip.

[Gloer]

My apology to all those who think so. I am sorry for it.

Denying huge consumption levels per capita sounds like you would not be too proud of consuming that much. It resembles an eating disorder called bulimia. First one eats, eats and consumes and then gets guilty feeling and throws up. Feels a bit better since eating was not "for good" and them eats some more.

Quit denying that US is leading consumption per capita. One only needs to visit any American home or shopping center to see the difference. Statistics are not the only evidence.

I would like to concentrate on other question: is it beneficial to consume? Does it make one happy to use resources?

Only good thing in resources is to have them. Nót so much using them.
I admit that I am a hoarder and a miser. I admire Japanese aschetism and savings mentality. US is on a slippery slope without any of it.

[Parrot]

*belatedly following Walter's lead*

[Gamil Zirak]

Originally posted by Gloer
sorry for all those who think so...
Denying huge consumption levels per capita sounds like you would not be too proud of consuming that much. It resembles an eating disorder callled bulimia. first one eats, eats and consumes and then gets guilty feeling and throws up. Feels a bit better since eating was not "for good" and them eats some more.
What does that have to do with anything? What does it matter our consumption per capita anyway? People who are bulimic throw up what they eat not because they feel guilty. After they throw up they feel guilty and depressed, not before. They in no way feel better about throwing up and then decide to eat some more.

Quit denying that US is leading consumption per capita. One only needs to visit any American home or shopping center to see the difference. Statistics are not the only evidence.
Have you ever been to a US home or a shopping center? Why has this turned out to be against the US? The title is directed at americans yet the facts in the first thread are refering to North America. The last time I checked North America included Mexico, Canada, and the United States (do those numbers refer to the Central American countries on the North American continent?). Yet this whole thing is being springboarded against Americans when the statistics given reflect the entire continent not one country.

I would like to concentrate on other question: is it beneficial to consume? Does it make one happy to use resources?
It does make one happy to purchase something (not necessarily to consume it). It's all psychological. It's a good fealing to pick something up in a store (doesn't have to be consumable resources) and walk up to the counter to buy it. You don't have to buy it to get that feeling; it's just from the mere joy of shopping.

Only good thing in resources is to have them. Never to use them.
I admit that I am a hoarder and a miser. I admire Japanese aschetism and saving mentality and US is on a slippery slope without any of it...
Resources are worthless unless they are used. What good does food do you if you don't eat it? Just let it sit there and not eat it. You'll starve to death. Same thing goes for water.

[Tar-Elenion]

How interesting. I ask a series of _questions_ regarding statements made by 'gate7ole', and what form doesthe responce take:




No, my friend, these are signs of a greedy way of life. Trying to excuse yourself is hypocritical.
[and]
But they don’t because they have the sense of ecology.
I see that you don’t have it.
[and]
I believe it is not your fault. It is the government’s fault that brainwash you to waste more and more greedily. Some of you may resist, but most of you (including probably Tar-Elenion) don’t.

When asking questions it seems I am "hypocritcal", have 'no sence of ecology' and am likely "brainwashed".
How intriguing. Insult and slander instead of reasoned debate. How typical.

[Gamil Zirak]

Unfortunately some members resort to name calling when they can not win. It's sad actually.

[gate7ole]

Originally posted by Tar-Elenion
How interesting. I ask a series of _questions_ regarding statements made by 'gate7ole', and what form doesthe responce take:
When asking questions it seems I am "hypocritcal", have 'no sence of ecology' and am likely "brainwashed".
How intriguing. Insult and slander instead of reasoned debate. How typical.

And it is typical for many members to play the misunderstood and good-willing. I thought your questions were rhetorical and did not actually want an answer. I took them for allusive questions. I may have been wrong. But this is not the point. We aren't discussing here how politeness can help a discussion (which sometimes it doesn't).
My point is the excessive use of resources and the destruction of the planet. This destruction is caused by ALL "civilized" countries. USA probably is a step above, due to its more consuming society. But my big argument against the US policy is that they do not intent to take any measures, while the European governments have shown such an intention. So, I assume, that the citizens do not press their government enough, since governments alone NEVER take ANY measure against the industries. And I conclude that the ecological sense of European citizens is greater than that of Americans.
That's my point, no insult, no hard-feeling, only my opinion.

[Gamil Zirak]

As I've stated above:
Most our all? You accuse the USA (one country) of not doing its part and say that most European countries do theirs. Why aren't the other European countries fixing their problems? Do you think that American industries don't have to answer to the Environmental Protection Agency? They have standards and regulations as well. I would love to see more nuclear power plants added to replace the cole burning ones we have now, but the same people that want us to reduce our "air polution" are telling us not to use cleaner means to produce energy. Did you know that in California they won't allow windmill turbins to be built to produce clean and efficient energy because it's an eye sore. These are the same people that think that we are poluting to much with the current power plants.
Why do you think we aren't doing anything about it? We have environmental standards coming out of our ears. European countries (the umbrella you are hiding under and not your own country) don't need to make more power plants because no one is moving their. Check the imigration rates of the US and compare them to any other country. How do you supposse we keep every one cool in the summer and warm in the winter? The existing power plants can't continue to provide for that. That's why we are making new ones.

[Legolam]

We have environmental standards coming out of our ears

But it's not like you adhere to them. And no senior American even turned up to the Johannesburg conference, which made it a bit of a farce really.

Check the imigration rates of the US and compare them to any other country

I'm willing to bet that Britain and America compare with each other in this respect.

[Gamil Zirak]

Originally posted by Legolam
But it's not like you adhere to them. And no senior American even turned up to the Johannesburg conference, which made it a bit of a farce really.
The financial penalties are enormous plus whatever clean up costs there are. Even Houstonians have to drive 55 inside Harris county lines because they couldn't get the air polution below a resonable level.

I'm willing to bet that Britain and America compare with each other in this respect.
In 2001 the US had 1,064,318 legal immigrants (who nows how many thousands cross the US/Mexico border every day) and an estimated (that's all that is available) 243,000 emigrant to other countries. That's a net of 821,318. -statistics from the INS website
In 2000 (I can't find the 2001 figures) the UK had 125,000 legal immigrants (an estimated 60,000 illegals or so is not included).-statistics from the BBS website

I'm having a hard time finding the emigration statistics for UK; however, the numbers there show the us getting over 8 times the immigrants in one year.

[Tyaronumen]

Hmm -- seems to me that the bottom line is that most Americans (industry, etc.) could (and should) be FAR more effiecient in their usage of resources, regardless of the use of resources elsewhere.

People do things like leaving the sink running while they brush their teeth, instead of simply turning the faucet off while they brush, then turning it back on against when they're finished to rinse, etc.

It's unnecessary, and undefendable. We'd reserve millions of gallons of water a year that go down the sink if people were educated to make this minor change in their behavior (and yes -- for most of humanity, drinkable water is a HUGE concern, and not a simple replenishable resource.)

Here in Colorado, water has become a HUGE issue due to inefficient usage. The average water usage in Denver is something like 76,000 gallons per unit (household, person, etc. I can't remember) compared to the national average of something like 56,000 gallons per unit (household, person, etc. I can't remember)... this is because people come to a climate that is high desert, and insist on planting Kentucky Bluegrass lawns everywhere...

Quite inefficient, and the water crisis here is to the point where many members of government are having to face the possibility of banning lawn watering altogether next year (hugely unpopular politically -- but even if we had one of the wettest winters on record, it would not mitigate the drought at this point)...

The point being, why use and use and use until there is a crisis that forces change? Why not be pro-active and curb use of water, power, etc. BEFORE there is a large problem?

[Gloer]

800 000 immigrants
divided by the population of US
250 000 000 = 8/2500 = 0,32 %

125 000 immigrants
divided by the population of UK
50 000 000 = 125/50000 = 0,25 %

I think the figures are quite comparable. UK is a huge immigration destination. And that is why the fastest men are English these days.

:D

If Finland should take that much = 0,25 % * 5 000 000 = 12500 a year.
That is not many.
We have a foreign population of 2 % of the total. That is lowest within EU. We take in 16 000 people a year, but as many as 14000 left so the netto is 2000.

Finland is not getting very full like the Netherlands.

[Gloer]

To reduce the CO2 emissions we have decided to increase the total amount of comercial nuclear reactors from four to five.
Hurrey for Kyoto agreement!

We do have a scientific reactor at the Polytechnical University, but they only produce weapons of mass destruction over there....:cool:

[Gamil Zirak]

The average water usage in San Antonio, Texas is about 54,000 gallons per household. We had water restrictions inacted (not because of over watering, but because of a draught) and the very next day we had about a week long flood. That's what I call a sence of humor by God. Anyway, who's to say that we all waste water. I seriously doubt everyone leaves the water running the whole time. I know I don't nor do I leave the doors open with the a/c running or leave lights on in a room that no one is in. I'm far from being an environmentalist though. I moved here from West Texas (dry and desert like) and we had water restrictions every summer. Everyone just new that they could only water their lawn every other day. Water is a replinishable source. God created the world so that we could continue to inhabit it without depleting all of the resources. It's expensive to built (but cheap to deliver water), but a water treatment plant can easily convert salt and unpure water into drinking water. They have several of them in the middle east. I mean I guess we could be like a lot of europeans and not bath, but it sure would smell bad over here in the Texas heat.

Oh and we should use the gross immigration numbers for the US and not the net so that we can compare apples to apples. That makes US have a 0.43%. Which is almost twice that of UK.

[Gloer]

We should use the gross numbers.

USA is drawing people in. EU not so much. UK I think is one of the places where immigrants go. Maybe I am wrong.

What we need are the statistics from EU as a whole.

[Tyaronumen]

Originally posted by Gamil Zirak
The average water usage in San Antonio, Texas is about 54,000 gallons per household. We had water restrictions inacted (not because of over watering, but because of a draught) and the very next day we had about a week long flood. That's what I call a sence of humor by God. Anyway, who's to say that we all waste water. I seriously doubt everyone leaves the water running the whole time. I know I don't nor do I leave the doors open with the a/c running or leave lights on in a room that no one is in. I'm far from being an environmentalist though. I moved here from West Texas (dry and desert like) and we had water restrictions every summer. Everyone just new that they could only water their lawn every other day. Water is a replinishable source. God created the world so that we could continue to inhabit it without depleting all of the resources. It's expensive to built (but cheap to deliver water), but a water treatment plant can easily convert salt and unpure water into drinking water. They have several of them in the middle east. I mean I guess we could be like a lot of europeans and not bath, but it sure would smell bad over here in the Texas heat.

Oh and we should use the gross immigration numbers for the US and not the net so that we can compare apples to apples. That makes US have a 0.43%. Which is almost twice that of UK.

No, everyone does not leave the water running the whole time... however, surprise surprise, there actually was a survey done several years ago that did reveal that a majority of Americans DO leave the water running the whole time that they brush their teeth, or shave, etc.

Water is only currently replenishable where they HAVE invested the large amounts of money and infrastructure to actually build desalination plants. Here, today, in Colorado, there is a finite amount of water that is available, and there will be a finite amount for the foreseeable future. Until there is a large investment in desalination plants here in the United States, water will continue to be an issue in places like Colorado, New Mexico, West Texas, etc.

Even in the case that there is a large investment in desalination plants, there is still the issue of building pipelines, etc. with enough cost-effectiveness that the water coming out of the other end does not end up with a rather large price-tag.

In any event -- people can and should be more efficient. Nothing can be gained from leaving a light on in a room that no one is in, or washing dishes by hand in a household that has a modern (efficient) dishwasher. On the other hand, there IS a gain from turning that light off, or saving that extra gallon or so of water. It may not seem appreciable -- but it IS when considered over time, and over many people. What's the big deal about people doing their part to minimize unnecessary waste?

[Gamil Zirak]

Good luck finding those stats. I had a heck of a time finding anything on just England.

Well the thing is, this whole thread was started to attack us ugly-fat-hypocritical-consuming-wasteful Americans. One our European counterparts was looking down their nose at us. Come on. Did they really thing we waste everything we have?

Anyway, higher prices will curb water usage. I know the only reason I don't do those "wasteful" things is because when I was younger my mom would get mad and scream something about costing more money. I didn't realize it at the time, but I do now. If you want people to conserve, it has to come out of their pocket book not out of their bleeding heart.

Edited so I don't double post

[Tyaronumen]

Originally posted by Gamil Zirak
Well the thing is, this whole thread was started to attack us ugly-fat-hypocritical-consuming-wasteful Americans. One our European counterparts was looking down their nose at us. Come on. Did they really thing we waste everything we have?

Anyway, higher prices will curb water usage. I know the only reason I don't do those "wasteful" things is because when I was younger my mom would get mad and scream something about costing more money. I didn't realize it at the time, but I do now. If you want people to conserve, it has to come out of their pocket book not out of their bleeding heart.

Uh -- what is so hard to understand about considering one's pocket book -in the future-?

Conservation makes sense.

[Gamil Zirak]

I was 10 and didn't know anything about where the electricity came from (i.e. we paid for it and the more we used it the more we paid) and the water didn't really matter because we had our own well.

Originally posted by gate7ole
I believe that all you Tolkien fans are not like the rest. We have understood the ecological messages of Tolkien’s work and cannot stay passive.
What are Tolkien's ecological messages?

[Gloer]

Net migration into EU is way way way more than in to USA!
UK is actually not very important immigration destination:
"
- Migration
"For the EU as a whole, the net migration rate in 2000 was 1.8 per 1 000 persons. This represents a slight decrease compared with 1999, and is considerably less than the peak observed in 1992 (3.7 per 1 000 persons)." (Eurostat Yearbook, 2001).

"Austria, Germany, Greece, Italy, and Sweden have in common a negative rate of natural increase and positive net migration. It was due to the migration balance that their populations increased in 1999.

In Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg, Norway, Portugal, Spain and Switzerland demographic growth was primarily due to immigration, although the natural increase remained positive.

In France, Japan, Korea the Netherlands, UK and US natural increase remains the principal component of population growth.

In Australia, Canada and Ireland, demographic growth is relatively sustained and evenly distributed between natural increase and net migration."
(OECD "Trends in International Migration 2001")
"
http://www.ecre.org/factfile/realfacts.shtml#mig

[Gamil Zirak]

Originally posted by Gloer
Net migration into EU is way way way more than in to USA!
UK is actually not very important immigration destination:
"
- Migration
"For the EU as a whole, the net migration rate in 2000 was 1.8 per 1 000 persons. This represents a slight decrease compared with 1999, and is considerably less than the peak observed in 1992 (3.7 per 1 000 persons)." (Eurostat Yearbook, 2001).
You didn't need any luck at all to find that. I guess since I new to go straight to the INS for the US info you new exactly where to go for EU.

However,
250 000 000 = 8/2500 = 0,32 %
That's 3.2 per every 1,000 which is, incidently, higher than the EU figure.

[Tar-Elenion]

Originally posted by gate7ole
And it is typical for many members to play the misunderstood and good-willing. I thought your questions were rhetorical and did not actually want an answer. I took them for allusive questions. I may have been wrong.
Yes, you were wrong. I asked the questions so that you would answer.

We aren't discussing here how politeness can help a discussion (which sometimes it doesn't).
Not engaging in slander and insult, such as you did, but rather keeping on point instead of attempting to deflect the valid course of discussion with meaningless insult, is a better way of furthering the debate.
But I will keep what you say in mind.


My point is the excessive use of resources and the destruction of the planet. This destruction is caused by ALL "civilized" countries. USA probably is a step above, due to its more consuming society.

'Probably'? Only 'probably'? If I am not greatly mistaken "civilized" countries like China and India are the greatest polluters in the world.


But my big argument against the US policy is that they do not intent to take any measures, while the European governments have shown such an intention.
Give an example.

So, I assume, that the citizens do not press their government enough, since governments alone NEVER take ANY measure against the industries.
This has been addressed by another poster.

So, you say that gas is needed in greater quantities in America. And what about water or electricity?
Water? We here in America, unlike Europeans, prefer to bathe more than once a week.
Electricity? Considering that our industry drives the world's economy, yes.


Why aren’t we convinced by our governments to spend more?
But you are convinced by your governments to 'spend' more. Of course this spending takes the form of the oppresively high tax rates you all have to pay. But since you like your governments controlling every aspect of your lives this is probably a good thing.


Your society, being young and therefore immature, is interested in the body. Ours in the mind. And that is a fact. Whatever powerful economy you have, you’ll be way back in culture.
Yes those mature and cultured minds that produced two world wars, fascism, communism, the holocaust, the Soviet purges and mass slaughters, religious persecution etc.
Our young culture produced freedom of speech, freedom of religion, government by, for and of the people, the rights of the individual over that of the state, has landed men on the moon, saved the world a couple of times etc.

[Gloer]

Originally posted by Gamil Zirak

You didn't need any luck at all to find that. I guess since I new to go straight to the INS for the US info you new exactly where to go for EU.

However,

That's 3.2 per every 1,000 which is, incidently, higher than the EU figure.

Oh yes so it seems.

And just right now there is a man on the news. He is from the OecD or IMF and he speaks american english. He says that Europe needs more new and young people if we expect better growth figures.

Economics is after all a simple thing: young people grow, build and consume. They look to future, are healthy (unless in Africa) and work more than sleep. More young -> more growth.

[Legolam]

We here in America, unlike Europeans, prefer to bathe more than once a week

I love these debates, they just bring out the best in people!

I don't really think the immigration thing makes a difference to ecology. America is the most polluting country in the world, per head. Because no senior American official attended the Johannesburg conference, the targets and agreements that were drawn up apply only to the countires that were represented and as such won't make a whole lot of difference because America isn't involved. I don't know why you guys aren't caring about the planet. I'm no big environmentalist, but I'd like to have a world to inherit.

PS in 1999 energy consumption in kWH/head
USA-13451
UK-5091.92
From the International Energy Agency

[Gamil Zirak]

Originally posted by Legolam
I don't really think the immigration thing makes a difference to ecology. America is the most polluting country in the world, per head. Because no senior American official attended the Johannesburg conference, the targets and agreements that were drawn up apply only to the countires that were represented and as such won't make a whole lot of difference because America isn't involved. I don't know why you guys aren't caring about the planet. I'm no big environmentalist, but I'd like to have a world to inherit.
Prove it with facts and then you'll convince us that we polute more than any other country. Why does polution have to be measured by head? If you are poluting alot it doesn't matter how many people are doing it, just the fact that pollution is high.

PS in 1999 energy consumption in kWH/head
USA-13,451
UK-5,091.92
From the International Energy Agency
Do these figures take into account businesses? I used to work for a convenience store chain in the accounting department and saw the utility bills come in. We had store that had over $1,000 a month in electricity bills. Take away all of the businesses and factories and compare personal.

Also, you left out a few countries:
Canada-16,571
Norway-24,983
Sweeden-15,450
Finland-15,076
Sudan-49.46

So that means Canada and three other European countries use more per capita that the US. I through in Sudan just for fun since they had the lowest per capita consumption (or at least that I could find). There were a lot more countries that consumed less per capita than the UK as well, but most of them are using the most polluting form of energy, coal.

[Gloer]

We heat our homes up in the north
canada, Scandinavia.
Pretty selection you have there.
Pick germany and france and compare them to New York state.