DHF30

     If the current world population was at about 900 million or less, we would still have developed , we might (a strong "might") still have caused climate change. But then it would not be at this rate. And that might still make us still a little complacent, but it would be under control. Plus it won't be at this time, the effect of which would be more time to develop sustainable energy sources.      Now population did not get the world this far in its growth and development. Surely everything is related to everything, so one way or the other it had its effect. One is that it intensified competition. I mean, a company's product being popular in a highly populated region is great gain to the organization. But the world's present level of growth and development, are results of drive and competition not population.      Population has always been means to an end not the end in itself- except in dumb regions that pursue the "glory" of attaining ...

     Writing about CO2 emissions and other greenhouse gases does not at all feel repetitive and boring yet - I mean, climate change though began quite a long time ago, it is still just starting to really hit us. But talks about the causes and sources of greenhouse gas emissions would just be stating already established facts (except new, completely new information come up). Not that it's unimportant; it's just mundane.      That said, sources of CO2 emissions (i.e, smokes from exhaust pipes of vehicles and generators , burning large amounts of garbage, mining etc… ) in Africa is not the subject here; I mean, all of Africa combined don't emit up to half of Asia,  or according to some stat (e.g, Union of Concerned Scientists) only China.      Emission of greenhouse gases has been a global norm for centuries now. We only are just starting to experience its effects. Talks relating to the "bastard" now hinge on how to reduce its abundance and...