The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum

Tea may be inefficient per kg of tea leaf, but how inefficient is it per kg of actual tea? Most foods aren't judged by their dessicated weight. Similarly though to a lesser extent for coffee.

You should also take into account that there will be less and less farmland due to buildings and most importantly, global warming.
This is often overlooked, but the destert areas near the equator will see temperature increases in such a way that we will lose a lot of farmland.

Why will we get more urbanisation while transportation gets faster and cheaper?

You are using the wrong metrics there. It is logical that the rural population decreases, because farms get bigger and bigger and the people working them get less and less, due to industrialisation.

So, what makes that the wrong metric, and what would be a better one?

I don't think that there are any metrics that prove his statement. It is incredibly far fetched, like saying: 'countries in which more citizens wear glasses are also countries in which cancer is the most prevalent'. -> 'nearsightedness causes cancer'.
Posting a graph with that statement doesn't give it any more validity :).

You should also take into account that there will be less and less farmland due to buildings

But in this specific case I think we're confused about the word urbanisation, which means a percentage increase (people moving from rural to cities), but also a land usage increase for urban areas.

Farmers and people on the countryside usually don't live in skyscrapers, but some of the urban population do. Of course cities might increase in size, but they might also have an increased population due to taller buildings.

The increased size of a city is not going to be as high as the decrease in land occupied by people moving away from the countryside. A thousand farmers might all have their own farm houses on the countryside, but when they move to a city, they might live in the same skyscraper.

That all really depends how you define countryside and city. It's different all across the world. Even in English speaking countries it differs, with different definitions :).

Well, Netherlands is a relatively small country with a very high population density, so in Netherlands there isn't necessarily so much difference between a city and the countryside. Your entire country is crowded.

(http://popdensitymap.ucoz.ru/60.Population_density-administrative_boundaries-ma.jpg)

I actually live in a small city with no skyscrapers

AMSTERDAM — The percentage of migrant residents in the four largest Dutch cities, Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Utrecht and The Hague, increased sharply from 36 to 43 percent between 1995 and 2003, the Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) said on Monday.

The total population of the four large cities grew by 66,000 between 1995 and 2003 due primarily to an expansion in municipal borders. The population increase in the original municipal borders only amounted to 19,000.

I have written a little about how plastic waste is affecting global fish stocks:

(https://image.ibb.co/h5d4Dk/plastic_waste.jpg)

http://archania.org/ending_the_destruction_of_our_habitat.html (http://archania.org/ending_the_destruction_of_our_habitat.html)

As I am investigating more about plastic waste, I am finding even more disturbing news:


https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/sep/06/plastic-fibres-found-tap-water-around-world-study-reveals (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/sep/06/plastic-fibres-found-tap-water-around-world-study-reveals)

Neither the graph nor the story on your page explains how plastic affects the fish stocks. You jump from 'fish stocks are declining' and 'plastic is increasing' to 'fish stocks are decreasing because of plastic' without actually explaining how fish die because of it, or how many fish die because of it.

One of the major problems with the plastic is that the contaminants cause premature death in animals. They can be ingested, leading to a painful death, and other dangers include strangulation or slow starvation if wildlife becomes imprisoned in the plastic. There is also concern about animals using the islands as transportation. They can end up far from their usual habitat and find themselves in unfriendly waters.

There are different types of ways that plastic is dangerous for humans. Direct toxicity from plastics comes from lead, cadmium, and mercury. These toxins have also been found in many fish in the ocean, which is very dangerous for humans. Diethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP) contained in some plastics, is a toxic carcinogen. Other toxins in plastics are directly linked to cancers, birth defects, immune system problems, and childhood developmental issues. To learn more on effects of plastics on humans visit the Ecology Center

Other types of toxic plastics are BPA or health-bisphenol-A, along with phthalates (mentioned above). Both of these are of great concern to human health. BPA is used in many things including plastic bottles and food packaging materials. Over time the polymer chains of BPA break down, and can enter the human body in many ways from drinking contaminated water to eating a fish that is exposed to the broken down toxins. Specifically, BPA is a known chemical that interferes with human hormonal function.

Plastics in the ocean is apparently also a problem for whales:

(http://cnnphilippines.com/incoming/7c4a5n-Whale-replica-greenpeace-6-CNNPH.jpg/ALTERNATES/LANDSCAPE_768/Whale-replica-greenpeace-6-CNNPH.jpg)

That's one heck of a piñata. That is to say, it does not look like a real whale.

I was suggesting that an actual image like the earlier one would perhaps be more convincing.