From: matus [matus@snet.net]
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2002 11:59 PM
To: matus@snet.net
Subject: MFD List - World Wild Life's paper on the state of the world

(All, here is an article that has been in the news recently published by the
World Wildlife Fund, which now has free time after successfully suing the
other WWF, the World Wrestling Federation, and forcing them to change their
name (I know I always confused the two)  In this paper, the WWF (not the
wrestlers!) found that the demands people have placed on the world is too
much and it can not sustain it.  We will all run out of food, water, energy,
and resources and all perish.  Oddly these are very similar to claims made
back in the early 1960's by Paul Eldridge.  In Eldrige's widely read book
'The population Bomb' he predicted that by the late 80's millions if not
billions of people would be starving to death because the population would
outpace the worlds ability to feed itself.  Yet these widespread famine's
never occurred.  What happened?  Eldridge, like people who try to predict
the future, did not take into account enough variables.  Namely the need and
ambition for people to continually better their own lives.  Today, 1/10th as
many people actually produce food as those who did in 1960, yet this fewer
people are starving than ever before, and there are fewer farmers than ever
before.  Eldridge took the existing growth curves of food production and
population and just extended them out, yet these assumed an increase that
only matched what the past increases have been.  This method does not take
into account an increase in the RATE of increase.  Thus food production has
far outpaced food demand.  Food is cheaper and more plentiful than ever
before.  Now these claims have shifted from food to resources and water.
The WWF claims that we would need three worlds to sustain everyone at the
level that the US sustains people.  Yet this is not the case, the US
produces 2/3rds of the worlds grain supply, a heavily energy intensive
process, and 3/4 of the worlds overall food supply.  Obviously the rest of
the world need not do this, since the US already is.  In addition the US's
energy consumption rates are compared with that of Europe, Europe, however
does not produce as significant proportion of the worlds food supply, and
has its population spread over a much smaller geographically area than the
US.  Also, as population density increases, the rate of energy consumption
increase per person actually decreases.  The average person in New York City
requires much less energy than the average Iowa farmer, simply because of
the economies of scale.  In fact, historically energy production per capita
has outpaced demand by about 2%, even with the massive increase in
population.  We continue to make better and more efficient devices for
generating energy, each an order of magnitude more efficient than the
previous. Well, read the article and judge for yourself, I will send more
out on this issue. - Mike)

Calamitous claim about life on earth
----------
Fox News
   The World Wildlife Fund has raised eyebrows with claims
   that the earth will no longer be able to sustain humans in 50
   years. "I don't think WWF credibility is much different from the
   World Wrestling Federation," said Jerry Taylor of the Cato
   Institute. (07/09/02)

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,57216,00.html

FNC
Tuesday, July 09, 2002
By Kelley Beaucar Vlahos


WASHINGTON - The planet is set to expire in the year 2050 due to the
over-consumption of natural resources, with the United States being the
worst offender, according to a report expected to be released Tuesday.

The World Wildlife Fund is keeping a tight grip on its "Living Planet"
study, but the U.K.'s Guardian Unlimited Observer Monday said the report
warns that the human race will no longer be able to sustain itself on this
planet in 50 years.

"In a damning condemnation of Western society's high consumptive levels,
[the report] adds that the extra planets [the equivalent size of Earth] will
be required by the year 2050 as existing resources are exhausted," the
Observer wrote.

Kyla Evans, a spokeswoman for the WFF in Sweden, said the general theme of
the British article is accurate, adding that the report is meant to set off
alarm bells against rapid resource depletion. But neither she nor members of
the Washington, D.C.-based staff would comment further on the Earth's
expected expiration date.

"We're continuing to look at the depletion of world resources," Evans said.
"In the report, we have figures for most of the countries in the world, how
much they are using and what it means to each person."

Not everyone is buying into the "chicken little" hysteria.

"At the end of the day I don't think WWF credibility is much different from
the World Wrestling Federation," said Jerry Taylor, director of the Natural
Resources and Environmental Studies Department for the Cato Institute,
alluding to WWF's recent success in a lawsuit against the wrestling
organization that forced a name change to World Wrestling Entertainment to
avoid confusion.

"I think someone needs to start drug testing employees of the World Wildlife
Fund," he added.

"It's the 'chicken little syndrome' that we are all going to die unless we
mend our evil ways," said Myron Ebell, a global warming and environmental
analyst with the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

The WWF's 2000 "Living Planet" study found that the demands being placed on
the Earth's natural resources were already 30 percent higher than the
Earth's ability to sustain them. It said the planet lost more than 30
percent of its natural resources in the last three decades and that by 2025,
two-thirds of the world's population will be experiencing water shortages.

The international organization contends that such rapid depletion has
already resulted in extended periods of drought and famine in
underdeveloped, poor countries, and will continue to add to extreme weather
patterns and natural disasters if consumption, which includes deforestation,
fish depopulation and energy, is not curbed on a wide-scale basis.

In addition, Monday's article said the study will also reveal that the
world's forest cover decreased 12 percent between 1970 and 2002, the Earth's
biodiversity dropped by a third and freshwater ecosystems shrank by 55
percent. It blames the United States for most of the burden on the
environment.

Pro-environment officials like David Cherry, a spokesman for the
Environmental Defense Fund, said the numbers are frightening and the race to
industrialize the Third World creates a challenge, but he expressed concern
that the WWF's putting a date on the Earth's inability to sustain itself
gives detractors too much ammunition to attack their goals.

Ebell said that despite the WWF's claims, other studies are widely available
that indicate that not only is agricultural production higher than ever, air
and water in developed regions are cleaner and energy sources are more
abundant.

Ebell acknowledged that in the poorer areas of the world, such as the Amazon
basin, forests are being depleted faster, but overall the loss is not as
devastating as the WFF and supporters contend. And, he added, the
panic-stricken don't take into account "human ingenuity."

"Our only limit to natural resources is human ingenuity," he said. "For a
while human beings had to use wood for energy and now we use coal and
tomorrow we will use something else. If you agreed that the only place to
find energy was in whale oil ... well, yes, this would be conceived as a
crisis, I suppose."

www.matus1976.com - Article archives