English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

My guess is that near 2100 the world will be almost completely depleted of natural resources... But, I'm no scientist. Anyone care to offer ideas?

2007-08-20 07:24:50 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics Earth Sciences & Geology

5 answers

Different resources have different timelines. Oil is predicted to "go offline" within 50 years. Coal, not for another 400, minimum. These, like any estimate, are always subject to revision as data accumulates and insights are built.
It's meaningless to debate timelines for renewables such as solar and wind, so let's not.

Let's set all this aside for a second, and remember how it all came about: human ingenuity. A few individuals with a little education, a little insight, and a lot of hard work, made an abstract idea concrete. From Edison's light, to the automobile, and just about every item you might see around you at a given instant.

With this in mind, how likely is it that we'll stand by, while our resources are extinguished? Not likely at all. So much so, that we're not "just standing by" - there's an incredible ammount of research being conducted into various alternative energy sources. We just have to be patient; they're not like oil, and take a lot longer to mature into established energy sources.

The most likely scenario - not a definite one, because the only definite scenarios are those that have already happened - is that, as a resource starts to dwindle, alternatives are gradually brought online.

Of course, the next 50 years will test in a way humanity has never been tested. Never in our history have we face the extinction of a resource which, in a real way, runs our infrastructure.

2007-08-20 07:34:25 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Actually running out of resources will not be the problem. We now have over 30 countries who have nuclear weapons. When we had them before the Russians didn't want to die and neighter did the USA. So those with money and power made sure it did not happen.
Pakistan was hauling nuclear weapons on the back of trucks with no security.
People in Russia are now broke and rapidly becoming Muslim.
Muslim's do not care about life and feel the earth will burn up when their goals are reached.
That is when they all go to heavenly bliss.
All the infidels go to hell to suffer for and eternity. So blowing up the earth and killing billions doesn't seem like that bad to them. They are going to die anyway. Animals have very little value to them at all.
So long before we run out of resources we will engage either in a nuclear war that will render the planet uninhabitable for any future generations. Or at least so polluted by toxic waste the survivors will be unable to reproduce. That is to bad because this seems to be not only a rare habitable planet but rich with life from plants to animals. Which will all go into oblivion and look like Mars.

2014-01-16 02:49:30 · answer #2 · answered by cloud 7 · 0 0

We will not run out of resources. Some may become harder to find and more expensive but in reality almost all natural resources have become cheeper due to better technology and greater reserves in spite of the doom and gloom reports that the media and some pessimists report.

2007-08-20 09:04:33 · answer #3 · answered by JimZ 7 · 1 0

Funny thing: In the 1890s, an executive from Rockefeller Oil wrote a letter to Congress saying the world was about to plunge into darkness because all the oil in Pennsylvania was nearly gone and that was that. He sent the letter and killed himself.

Might as well set your doomsday clock for when the sun will burn out and go hide in a cave.

2007-08-20 08:22:02 · answer #4 · answered by David S 5 · 2 2

The 12 of Never. Matter can not be created or destroyed.

2007-08-20 07:31:42 · answer #5 · answered by Steel Rain 7 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers