The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Australia's Population Growing Much Faster Than Government Projections
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the Sydney Morning Herald:

Is the door too open or too closed when it comes to population?

By David Crowe
20 July 2018 — 9:07pm

… The lesson from the recent past is that political promises are worthless where population and migration are concerned. Only the numbers count and the numbers show the emptiness of the rhetoric. Every time the federal government updates its forecasts, it admits the population is growing faster.

The population will reach 25 million within three weeks, about nine years earlier than forecast in the Howard government’s Intergenerational Report.

The first Intergenerational Report was in 2002, so missing by 9 years is a lot.

But what could possibly go wrong?

Nothing.

Unless less rain falls on Australia, as in the Millennium Drought of 1997-2009. But that would be “climate change,” and everybody respectable knows that “climate change” is a hoax, so Australia’s elites are perfectly justified in never giving a moment’s thought to the interaction of mass immigration and “climate change.”

What? I got Climate Change backwards? It is respectable to worry about worsening droughts in the future? Oh, okay, thanks …

So then everybody respectable worries about the interplay of mass immigration and climate change?

No?

Why not?

It just never seems to come up? It’s as if the two concepts never occur in the same head at the same time?

How do they do that?

Seriously, if you read Jared Diamond’s 2005 book Collapse very carefully, you might notice that Diamond is skeptical about whether Australia has enough water to support mass immigration:

“Contrary to their government and business leaders, 70 percent of Australians say they want less rather than more immigration.”

But that’s about it for publicity for this topic …

 
Hide 77 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Australia is the driest continent (after Antarctica). 90% of the population lives on a narrow coastal strip up the east coast. There are no major inland rivers (the Darling is an overgrown creek, and the Murray River, the best that there is, is up for grabs in constant ‘water wars’ by would-be irrigators and towns which rely on it.) The biggest city, Sydney, built a desal plant when its major dam, Warragamba, got down below 30% full. Luckily some rain came along since and the plant’s still in mothballs. Of other state capitals, the water in Adelaide is practically undrinkable (they rely on the tail end of the aforementioned Murray River), and Perth is running out of water as well.
    Large scale immigration is an idiot’s game in Australia.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Anonymous
  2. Wazoo says:

    I’d be more worried about the impact of climate change on Africa. Droughts + a population boom will lead to starvation and a mass exodus of refugees to Europe and beyond. Europe better get ready.

  3. It is very respectable to worry about Global Climate Disruption (TM-pending). It’s just that most of those particular respectable people are talking out their asses. That doesn’t matter though. Because there is no working model of the earth’s climate and the science has settled into a pile of crap, GCD can be used in concert with any other issue you want it to, if you are respectable.

    More immigration is good, because the immigrants are moving to white developed countries where people understand GCD and will go carbon neutral before you know it. Already, my household is carbon-neutral, this guy who self-immolated is carbon-neutral, my deceased Grandma is carbon-neutral.

    In the meantime, water is bad anyway, as it’s a (way bigger) greenhouse gas than Carbon Dioxide, but … well, that’s another thing we don’t need to talk about. That’d be opening another can of worms, which, luckily, are themselves carbon-neutral.

  4. Anon[680] • Disclaimer says:

    Australia’s problems are more down to poor management of resources than a lack of them. I refuse to believe a country that’s suffered this many floods in the past ten years has a serious water problem.

  5. @Anon

    How many floods in the ten years before the last?

  6. JimBonobo says:

    We have Luddites on the loose again. Australians are not going to die of thirst no matter how many people move there. Modern desalination methods can produce fresh water for about $3 per 1,000 gallons. That’s plenty cheap for residential use and for most commercial uses. Australia is a rich country, we’re not talking about Sudan. Almost all Aussie cities are on the coast. They could easily supply all the residences with desalinated seawater for a relatively small amount of money. The one catch is that even at these low prices, the desalinated water will be too expensive for most agricultural uses, so they might also need to import food, but once again, a rich country with lots of exports of coal, iron, gold, etc. will have no problem buying some wheat, rice or corn or other foods on international markets. Australia could double or triple its population, no problem. It’s the size of the continental USA and they have only 25 million people!

  7. @JimBonobo

    Australia in 2000 had some of the world’s great golf courses. Will they have golf courses left in 2050?

    • LOL: Simon in London
    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Anonymous
    , @gate666
  8. Not Raul says:

    I agree with Steve and Jared.

    Australia’s limiting factor is water. All the land in the world can’t support people without water.

    Australia should be more careful about immigration, and other things that make demands on the water supply.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  9. Mass immigration is driven by Wall Streets (globalist business) need for bucks joined with Mean Street (tribalist partisan) need for votes, both of which require the dismantling of Main Street (nationalist state).

    The economic interests of global capitalists in the financial administration of the wealthfare state mesh with the ethnic interests of tribal multiculturalists in the political administration of the welfare state.

    The ethnic interests are largely managed by Third World Tammany Hall which now runs what were once the white nationalist Labor parties – see Corbyns Momentum for a pure example of that “ideological pole reversal”. In Australia, the metropolitan Labor party is largely a creature of ethnic branch stackers and depends on NESB (non European speaking) voters.

    Ultimatrly money drives everything. Australias post Cold War “economic miracle” has been driven by Asian economic growth. This has driven demand for Australian real estate, mineral exports and higher education. Higher educated Asian immigrants are a also critical source of professional services and international buiness administration, driving down labour costs.

    Of course this population growth is driving a slow motion collapse in the national ecology and a failure to achieve GHG emission targets which will in turn collapse the global ecology. Not to mention the dissipation in ethnic solidarity and the spending half the day in traffic jams.

    A small price to pay for seven percent compounding growth in property prices.

  10. Anon[395] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer

    If it so pleases the Chinese/Indian colonial overlords, then there will be golf.

  11. @JimBonobo

    Yes, but at what cost? Provided you don’t mind living like a battery chicken, population growth isn’t a big issue. However, if expect to do things like eat affordable fresh food, drive to work without sitting in a three hour traffic jam, pursue outdoor activities like fishing and hiking on the weekends, and get a reasonable wage for a middle-of-the road job, then population growth is a big issue. House prices in Australia and New Zealand have doubled (relative to wages) over the last 40 years, bottled water sales are soaring, river pollution is now worse than in Europe, traffic congestion in major cities has reached Northern Hemisphere levels, and many popular tourist walks are covered in litter.

  12. Anon[996] • Disclaimer says:
    @Neoconned

    Good for her. At least one congressperson has the courage to do the right thing.

  13. Anon[996] • Disclaimer says:
    @Hans Tholstrup

    Where is it not an idiot’s game?

  14. Even if Australia could support more immigrants, why would it want to?

    I imagine I could gain one hundred and fifty pounds and live. However, I fail to see the attraction.

  15. Anoni says:

    I work a bit in the climate field. And it really is amazing how immigration and climate is something that you just simply can’t talk about, you just get to shut up very quickly. I even did a little work on the I Steve idea of exactly how much carbon we are adding by importing half of Guatemala. And my findings basically agree with what Steve found, except it’s a lot bigger importing from Central America rather than Mexico cuz Mexico has much higher CO2 per person. But it’s completely unpublishable. Nobody at an environmental economics Journal would look at it at all. It does drive me crazy how doctrinaire conservatives are about climate change. There is something happening for sure, it does seem to be getting hotter, but it drives me crazier that the left can’t recognize that you simply can’t have immigration at the level we are and do anything about climate change. It’s impossible

    • Replies: @Altai
  16. anon[191] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    Big floods in western Queensland happen every few years, the water fills Lake Eyre for a few months, then it’s dry again.
    In coastal Queensland, every flood since 2006 has been caused by dam operators holding water during heavy rain in the catchments, then opening the dam gates at the worst possible time for downstream residents.
    Before the State Government took over management of all Local Government Dams and Weirs in 2006, the operators would release water as needed into the rivers according to the tides.
    Since 2006, the new operators go by the rule book, and every minor flood turns into a major flood.

  17. Anoni says:
    @JimBonobo

    Nobody is going to have so little water they can’t drink. But water could get too expensive to farm anymore. And if you actually think climate change is an issue, then desalination plants draw a huge amount of power. So you will be tripling down on the climate affects, by having a lot of immigration and then providing water to that immigration through desalination. And no there isn’t going to be enough Renewable Power to offset that. None of us know how much of a problem climate change is going to be, but if it is a problem Australia is dead in the Target area of the places that is going to have the biggest issues.

    • Replies: @Logan
  18. anon[191] • Disclaimer says:

    In the 3 largest cities [Brisbane, Sydney, and Melbourne], Immigration is all that’s stopping a Depression.

    Here’s how it works: 1.Bring a family of ten here from Peasantistan, and give an Age Pensioner the boot from their Government Housing to accomodate the new arrivals.
    2. If a large enough house can’t be found out of Government Housing stock, buy one on the open market.
    3. Buy 2 adjacent houses in the suburbs on the open market, knock them down, then build 20 single occupant apartments for the Age Pensioners who were evicted.

    That keeps the Real Estate lobby and construction industry on side, and that’s all that matters.
    In rural Queensland, the biggest Industry is Local Governments bidding against one another to resettle refugees.
    Since 100% of refugees will be on Welfare, it does nothing for the man in the street, but it’s good for Real Estate interests and the big 2 retailers [Woolworths and Coles].

  19. Anonymous[358] • Disclaimer says:

    A dangerous and foolish policy for Australia.

    The historical and geological record clearly shows that periodically, Australia is hit by some drastic mega-droughts causing extreme water scarcity.
    In Victorian times, one such drought more or less wiped out agriculture across vast swathes of southern and eastern Australia.

  20. Anonymous[537] • Disclaimer says:
    @Hans Tholstrup

    Also, anyone with any conservationist or evolutionist bone in their body must be desperately concerned with the fate of the Australian lungfish.

  21. Anonymous[358] • Disclaimer says:
    @Wazoo

    Don’t worry.

    The Economist tells us that a massive influx of black Africans into Europe will ‘boost the economy’ and ‘fund social security’.

    Europe’s politicians are dumb, vain and gullible enough to take that shit seriously.

    Count on it.

  22. Anonymous[537] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    Evidently, you don’t know much about Australia.

    Or the realities of desert living/semi-tropics/aridity/pacific storm systems/billabongs/flat terrain etc etc.

    Geography 101 for you.

  23. Anonymous[358] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    Why do you think that such an enormous landmass as Australia was only the barest possibly populated until a mere 200 years ago and with the arrival of Europeans?

    Even ‘primitive’ peoples will grow into their carrying capacity.
    And the aborigines had 40,000 years to do it – not to mention the untold multitudes of Malay types but a few hundred miles further north who had ‘culture’ and were, presumably, hungry for land.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Altai
  24. Anonymous[358] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Apparently, Australia has a golf course with a colony of Bull Sharks resident in the water traps.
    A flood brought them there, or so the story goes.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas
  25. anon[274] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    Figures vary on how many Aborigines were here in 1788, but one thing is for sure:
    Pastoralists followed a policy of extermination on the Mainland and succeeded in exterminating the Tasmanian Aborigines.
    It’s in their descendants interests to play down the numbers, but remember there are 100 million sheep in Australia. Let’s say the environmental demands of a sheep and a primitive Aborigine aren’t dissimilar.
    40,000 years probably isn’t accurate either, but even 2,000 years would’ve built up a population of a few million at least.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    , @sb
    , @Emblematic
  26. @anon

    Let’s say the environmental demands of a sheep and a primitive Aborigine aren’t dissimilar.

    Australian Aboriginals can eat grass?

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @anon
    , @for-the-record
    , @Logan
  27. gate666 says:
    @Steve Sailer

    why should golf courses matter?

  28. Anon[248] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Let’s say the environmental demands of a sheep and a primitive Aborigine aren’t dissimilar.

  29. @Neoconned

    Ocasio Cortez endorses the BDS movement

    Well, media interest in her will dry up quickly.

    As in that movie The Last King of Scotland, once a leader like Amin or Ocasio turns against Israel, their movie has about ten minutes left.

    • Replies: @MBlanc46
  30. anon[630] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Heh.
    Not as far as I know, but they ate plenty of kangaroos and wallabies, which only eat grass.
    Also on the menu: Porcupines, snakes, lizards, frogs, galahs, cockatoos, dingo pups, some say people
    occasionally, pretty much anything.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  31. @Anon

    I refuse to believe a country that’s suffered this many floods in the past ten years has a serious water problem.

    First, Australia’s droughts and floods are a result of the Southern Pacific Oscillation. Essentially, we get the other end of the El Nino/La Nina cycle, which is usually about a decade long. So the fact that it rained a great deal on one year does not mean that we won’t be running out of water five years after that. Anything less than a couple of decades of data tells you nothing about the climate.

    Second, Australia is nearly the same size as the 48 continental states. It covers three time zones. It’s bigger than Europe. Yeah, Darwin gets pretty wet. This does not mean that water won’t be a problem in Sydney.

  32. Anonymous[572] • Disclaimer says:
    @anon

    Apparently a great deal of interesting megafauna – including all sorts of weird and wonderful marsupials – was wiped out by the Aborigines.

    On a more positive note, an even bigger/fiercer Komodo Dragon was exterminated by the Aborigines. Presumably for food.

  33. @Steve Sailer

    Australian Aboriginals can eat grass?

    From Nutrition studies (1948) of nomadic Aborigines in Arnhem Land, northern Australia:

    Food-collecting techniques of 20 Aborigines were studied continuously for 4 days. Foods collected included: animal foods — fish and oysters. Plant foods — mostly tubers of Dioscorea transversa (parsnip yam), some tubers of Curculigo ensifolia (grass potato) and some tubers of Amorphophallus galbra (stinking arum).

  34. sb says:
    @anon

    There are plenty of people who claim to be Tasmanian aborigines and are excepted as such .
    True there have been no full bloods (if you’ll pardon the expression ) since the nineteenth century but then aren’t there American Indians ( or whatever the current PC term is ) in the same situation ?

    There were never that many in the first place -a couple of thousand in a couple of clans -and were very probably headed for eventual extinction as had happened with other isolated island communities , where newcomers had never turned up , as their population had long been in decline

    They say that there are no full blood Maori left ( there I go again ) yet I’ve never heard that the Maori are extinct

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas
  35. m___ says:

    Climate change and Population numbers are not correlated. Or are they.

    Climate change is not (or is it) influenced by population numbers, but only by the behavioral patterns of production, logistics, lifestyle? So more people adapting to different behavior, makes population numbers neutral? More people with better attitudes will alter climate change into reverse?

    After all population numbers, migrations, are at the sanctuary of being questioned at all. “What good is the population variable growing globally in numbers”, is a politically incorrect question. It all amounts to the sanctity of “growth” in any sense to humans, the global economy. Quality of living cannot be measured by our economists (or can it).

    Class inequality nothing to do with this? Why keeping priviledge and the elites “small” and “smaller” as to the ones benefitting. In itself a barometer for climate change?

    Why not knowing what to do with the bulging middle class and it’s proletarian mindset. Are universities ever churning out more and smarter “intellectuals”?

  36. Altai says:

    Is the door too open or too closed when it comes to population?

    This is an excellent way to frame things. Don’t use the word ‘immigrant’ or ‘immigration’ just mention population expansion and entirely optional, artificial sources of it.

  37. Altai says:

    Train overcrowding is a serious issue in Melbourne and Sydney. As has increasing incidents of groping. These two things, of course, have nothing in common.

  38. @Wazoo

    Unfortunately, you are correct that when the Establishment Media finally does connect Climate Change™ and mass immigration from overpopulated Africa, it will only be to justify the latter with the former. The obvious corollary that the latter aggravates the former will remain CrimeThink.

    Also, the fact that most greenhouse emissions comes from Asia, where no one is letting Africans immigrate, will remain off the table.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Altai
  39. Altai says:
    @Anoni

    This is why we’re at a fourth turning. 80 years ago the political clock was reset and ideologies evolved to deal with the situation. Then over time like a rolling stone odd political alliances etc create more and more intricate ideology that no longer are pragmatic but more and more doctrinal.

    To today where the Left in the West (Outside Denmark) can’t function to make their societies more egalitarian because they regard ethnic homogeneity as pure evil and thus immigration from anywhere as inherently good. Both causing sky-rocketing rates of inequality and destroying the futures of young people and destroying the basis of social solidarity needed to fight inequality in the future.

    And as the Left adopted identity politics, the Right adopted Reagan-Thatcher economic theory that made any concepts of limits to growth of regulation evil and thus global warming can’t be real because it implies management and control of certain resources and investments in the long term to mitigate it’s effects. It implies limits to growth.

    Thus despite both global warming and mass migration (And indeed mass migration caused or intensified by global warming) are both obviously existential threats to our societies, only one side of the political divide in the US (This is less a phenomena outside the US and Australia) is capable ideologically of accepting them and believes the one they don’t accept as a viscous political lie concocted by their opponents.

    It seems the end of the Soviet Union and triumph of neoliberalism meant the transformation of all mainstream political parties into agents for policies preferred by the new elite as Steve mentions all the time, our definitions of privilege all seem to downplay class more and more.

    I knew a guy I went to school with who was from a rich family and an asshole who found himself and became a new left political activist. (You know the type, twitchy, constantly aggro like a religious zelot) He told a story of putting up a poster in a very depressed part of town calling for an end to deportations of refused fake Nigerian asylum seekers. An old, haggered local man who was actually working class berated them for standing up for ‘blacks who are the ruin of the place’ rather than the poor natives who were being displaced.

    He was so triggered and disdainful of this actual working class man who unlike him didn’t have any rich parents to bail him out or any meaningful future or joy in watching his home and community displaced, that he got angry and wrote ‘This is why it has to be classed based instead of this shit’. It never occurred to him that he was the one starting ‘this shit’. He was engaged in promoting inequality on the basis of race and ethnicity. He was the one helping destroy class solidarity. (Which he’d never understand since he was a rich kid just walking through the area) The old man was reacting to all this.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
  40. @Not Raul

    Not just Australia. The American Southwest depends on the Colorado River for fresh water. Currently that water supply is 100% used. Nothing reaches the Pacific Ocean. Every new resident gets water by taking it away from the current residents.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
  41. Altai says:
    @Almost Missouri

    Also, the fact that most greenhouse emissions comes from Asia, where no one is letting Africans immigrate, will remain off the table.

    The Chinese can always counter in that case quite reasonably that the bulk of the emissions were caused historically by the West.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  42. @Anonymous

    Apparently, Australia has a golf course with a colony of Bull Sharks resident in the water traps.

    This sounds plausible, since the Bull Shark is one of a few shark species which can tolerate brackish and fresh water. There are reports of bull sharks sighted all the way up the Mississippi into the Great Lakes region.

  43. @sb

    There were never that many in the first place -a couple of thousand in a couple of clans -and were very probably headed for eventual extinction as had happened with other isolated island communities , where newcomers had never turned up , as their population had long been in decline

    They say that there are no full blood Maori left ( there I go again ) yet I’ve never heard that the Maori are extinct

    It seems to me that cannibalism is a sort of failsafe for isolated human populations. If you’ve exceeded the carrying capacity of the environment, or you have a sudden environmental change making food scarce, why not eat your neighbor (more likely, a rival clansman competing for scarce resources) even if you have to concoct some ritualistic excuse? It’s a two for one – you get fed, and there’s one fewer mouth to feed relieving the pressure on the flora and fauna.

    I wonder if Maori populations may have simply gone through cycles of plenty and scarcity in which cannibalism was practiced to sharply decrease resources demand and bring the population back from the brink.

    • Replies: @dearieme
  44. Australians aren’t likely to thirst or starve to death (barring genocide).

    However their cities will become increasingly miserable, crowded and dysfunctional places, same as everywhere else.

    • Replies: @Anon
  45. Altai says:
    @Neoconned

    She might not be in so much trouble. BDS doesn’t say anything a Liberal Zionist would balk at anymore.

    Gilad Atzmon has pointed out the BDS is becoming more kosher as it has changed since it became full of more and more American Jews and is now a Soros-funded project which has changed the language from one that focuses on the Palestinians to one which essentially legitimises the 67 borders. (It used to call for a boycott of all Israeli goods, now it’s just what comes from the Settlements. It also used to call for a right of return.) This is desirable to secular Zionists who don’t care about the West Bank but want a Jewish state. Though at this point it’s too late and a two state solution was made defacto impossible by the settlements (Including the ethnic cleansing of East Jerusalem) over 20 years ago, with Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as the undivided capital of Israel making it official.

    https://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/bds-can-you-spot-the-difference.html

    https://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/bds-changed-its-goal-statement-once-again

    https://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/is-the-bds-democratic.html

  46. Altai says:
    @Anonymous

    Famously this happened when settlers came to certain areas and were surprised at how despite the local Aborigines having agriculture, they were so few and the forests not cleared in large amounts. They just presumed they were lazy. (So lazy they let themselves and their children starve? I feel like only Protestants could come up with that one. )

    Turns out the soil layer was razor thin and blew away when large-scale clearance was conducted.

    Modern large-scale agriculture in Australia is almost entirely dependant on artificial fertilisers. (Whilst abuse of these is a problem everywhere, Australia is unique in being dependant on it)

  47. What about our own west and southwest? It’s not often noted that much of it is technically desert.

    The red stuff is desert.

    • Replies: @Obsessive Contrarian
  48. Anon[680] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    Alright, so I guess I was wrong

  49. @Obsessive Contrarian

    Oops, not desert, elevation, but in the US the two are correlated.

    • Replies: @Logan
  50. Logan says:
    @Anoni

    Not enough Renewable Power, perhaps. But nuclear can provide unlimited electricity with zero carbon emissions.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  51. Logan says:
    @Steve Sailer

    We all of us eat grass. A lot of it.

    Wheat, corn, rice, barley, etc. are all grasses.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  52. TG says:

    Indeed.

    A classic propaganda technique is to claim that we don’t need to worry about a problem because it will soon go away on its own.

    I’m old enough to remember starting way back in 1970, that every year learned economists and sociologists would claim that we didn’t need to worry about the third world population explosion because this world fertility rates are declining. And we don’t need to worry about illegal immigration because it will soon stop of its own accord as their home nations become rich. And we don’t need to worry about legal immigration for the same reason.

    And every year, the predictions are wrong. And every year, the same predictions are made that we don’t need to worry about massive population growth. And for nearly 50 years and counting, this has been a lie.

    Honest people make mistakes. But when they do, they apologize and explain. Dishonest people lie – and continue to lie, and never apologize, never explain, never mention the 50 years of past wrong predictions and why this time is different.

    The population explosion is not an accident: it has been largely created and aided by official policy aimed at maximizing population growth either through direct pro-natalist policies, or massive immigration (when people from places like Bangladesh move to places like Switzerland, this doesn’t just move people around – it maximizes growth, as everyone leaving Bangladesh makes room for one more person to be conceived and survive to adulthood), and, perhaps most importantly, through an official policy of neglect and refusal to discuss the matter.

    Now the global population is pushing against our current limits. The green revolution is tapped out and subject to diminishing returns. Refugee flows will accelerate, and more and more nations will either adopt lifeboat ethics or be pulled down. It won’t be pretty. But it could have been avoided.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
  53. MBlanc46 says:
    @Wazoo

    The conflict will be between the Africans already resident in Europe and those still invading.

  54. Anon[339] • Disclaimer says:
    @Simon in London

    However their cities will become increasingly miserable, crowded and dysfunctional places, same as everywhere else.

    Why?

  55. MBlanc46 says:
    @JimBonobo

    You’re not talking about Sudan, yet.

  56. dearieme says:
    @Alec Leamas

    “Maori populations may have simply gone through cycles of plenty and scarcity”: it was much worse. They arrived in temperate NZ with their topical horticulture package. The chooks and pigs died, and the only crop that worked well was the sweet potato – and that only on the the North Island and the top end of the South Island. They hunted the edible flightless birds to extinction or nearly so; there were no land mammals of any food value. Then the sea mammals and fish started to dwindle from over-fishing. No ruddy wonder they ate each other.

    • Replies: @Logan
  57. MBlanc46 says:
    @JudyBlumeSussman

    For the moment, yes. But, as I understand it, BDS is a growing thing on college campuses. It’s academia that sets the Leftist agenda. The corporate media might be able to ignore it for awhile, but even the NYT and the WaPo have to keep up with the trends or be devoured. We shall see.

  58. @JimBonobo

    Seawater desal plants are not cheap. The biggest one in the US is near San Diego and price tag was near or >$1 billion. They consume vast amounts of energy and create a briny by-product that is a disposal challenge. These things have to be constructed because we have to provide water for the Mexicans et al moving into southern California. None of these constraints are going away w ‘better technology’.
    We can add more more more people but do we want to live comfortably with less traffic and less congestion and adequate water supplies even during drought and preserve some natural habitat etc; or live in an overcrowded overpaved always-congested parking lot in which expensive desal plants have to be built to provide water for all the new people? Not sure what the point is w the latter approach. “Let’s see how overcrowded and uncomfortable we can get”?

  59. @anon

    The only reason Australia can support millions of sheep and cattle is because Europeans brought up ground water using windmills and bores.

    Less glamorous 19th century technological advances such as improved windmills and wire fencing don’t get as much attention as, say, railroads when explaining the incredible expansion and success of 19th century European settler societies (including the American West) but they were just as vital.

  60. @Altai

    The Chinese can always counter in that case quite reasonably that the bulk of the emissions were caused historically by the West.

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but we’re going to live in the future, right?

    • Replies: @Altai
  61. @Logan

    Nuclear power is great, but it’s not much good for providing water.  It’s just too small.  The 2.3 GW of waste heat from an AP1000 would only evaporate about 3600 m³ of water per hour.  That’s only about 1200 acre-feet.  You aren’t going to be irrigating really big areas that way.

    The convection towers described in “Defeating the son of Andrew” (Analog, Feb. 1994) might be an option for ag-scale water.  They’re essentially a scheme to set up captive thunderstorms fed by hot, humid sea-surface air.  They’d generate copious amounts of fresh water, as well as having a large potential for electric generation.  Since the water would be generated way up in the air you could carry it down to the ground under a large amount of hydraulic head and just let it flow to points uphill under that pressure, but the demands on the pipe for strength might be a bit much.

    • Replies: @Logan
    , @Anonymous
  62. @Logan

    Wheat, corn, rice, barley, etc. are all grasses.

    You’re not eating the grass proper.  You’re eating the grass seeds.

    • Replies: @Logan
  63. Logan says:
    @Mr. Rational

    I was specifically referring to reverse osmosis, which requires a lot of electricity. Nuclear power has the potential to produce essentially unlimited electricity with zero carbon emissions.

    Also I was referring mostly to urban water use. I kind of doubt desalination is ever going to be practical for open-air agriculture. It will work, you can grow stuff that way, butit won’t be economically practical relative to areas where the water conveniently just falls out of the sky or flows by gravity out of a river. Or even pumped out of an aquifer.

  64. Logan says:
    @dearieme

    Why did the pigs die? They’re not exactly averse to temperate zones. Why didn’t they go back and get some more?

  65. Logan says:
    @Obsessive Contrarian

    Not exactly. In fact, as you go up in elevation, the precipitation generally increases. Deserts in the US, which I’ve spent several decades exploring, are generally on relatively low ground in the rain shadow downwind of mountains. The mountains squeeze the rain out of the clouds, leaving little to fall on the land downwind.

  66. Altai says:
    @Steve Sailer

    But that has nothing to do with assigning the kind of guilt that involves population replacement. The current level of CO2 and other GHG in the atmosphere and oceans was mostly brought about by activity in the West, despite an impressive Dickensian effort by China to catch up. From a Chinese perspective the West can always be assigned more of the responsibility for the current situation.

    So even if China has more responsibility to stop emissions in order to deal with the problem. They can always say that it’s ultimately the West who have the greater responsibility to deal with those displaced. Plus they’ll likely start to do a serious effort to reduce emissions in that special way only authoritarian regimes can. (My money is on nuclear power.) So the West needs to be prepared to deal with a serious guilt-tripping. I suggest we bring up Tibet and the Uyghurs a lot along with the fact that all that legal infrastructure for dealing with this was the effort and idea of Nordic people.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
    , @Anonymous
  67. @Logan

    Desalination will be economically feasible for affluent people’s showers. For their gardens? Depends on how big they are and what they like to grow. For grass covered parks, golf courses, and college or office campuses? Not most places. Agriculture? No.

  68. @TG

    (when people from places like Bangladesh move to places like Switzerland, this doesn’t just move people around – it maximizes growth, as everyone leaving Bangladesh makes room for one more person to be conceived and survive to adulthood)

    Actually this is wrong. When a Bangladeshi moves to Switzerland, it removes a potential breeder from a high-fertility region and it transplants him to the West, where his fertility quickly approximates to the same sub-replacement rate as the natives. The net effect of mass immigration to the West is to denude the provinces of people and transport them all into the decaying cities merely to bolster them up awhile.

    It does not maximize population growth, for it results in fewer children being born overall. It maximizes the number of adults who reside in the urban centers at any one time, which is really what we’re talking about when we make reference to traffic, crowding, wage deflation, and so forth. As for population growth properly considered, it actually destroys it.

  69. J1234 says:

    We’re in Australia right now. Cairns yesterday and the Gold Coast today. About half the faces I see in the city centers are non-white. Hard to tell what % are tourists, but I’d say over half of the shop help or waiters are Asian of one sort or another. Everyone in Cairns seems thrilled that the city’s pop. has tripled in 20 years, but there will be a cost to this economic boom.

    One of the Muslim taxi drivers was complaining about how horribly racist the native Aussies are. (Then go back home, idiot.) He now wants to go to the US because his friends in the US tell him you just go into a store, pay cash and walk out with a gun. Not true at all, I told him. Seems Muslim immigrants are telling lies and myths to get other Muslims to get them to move the US (or Australia.)

  70. @Logan

    I was specifically referring to reverse osmosis, which requires a lot of electricity.

    To be specific, it requires a lot of mechanical work to power the pumps.  That can come direct, without an electric intermediary.

    You can run stills off of waste heat at much lower temperatures than PWR steam.  This allows you to generate electricity with most of the available energy and then employ the stills as a “bottoming cycle” running off the mostly-spent, low-temperature steam.  You get a win/win.

    Nuclear power has the potential to produce essentially unlimited electricity with zero carbon emissions.

    Very true.  Quite disingenuous of the watermelons to hate it with such a passion, isn’t it?

    I kind of doubt desalination is ever going to be practical for open-air agriculture.

    If you had the water, you could make Australia bloom.  An Australia which is dependent on food imports is vulnerable to e.g. shifts away from coal power… like Indonesia going over to ThorCon nuclear reactors wholesale.  It’s by far better for Australia to be able to feed itself.  And don’t you think it would be great to have a bunch of “pet thunderstorms” making water and electric power for you?

    Or even pumped out of an aquifer.

    Aquifers can and do run dry when pumped past replenishment.  Nebraska won’t be husking corn for much longer, because the Ogalala there is going to be empty quite soon.

  71. @Altai

    they’ll likely start to do a serious effort to reduce emissions in that special way only authoritarian regimes can. (My money is on nuclear power.)

    That doesn’t take much in the way of foresight, given that China started the world’s first EPR on June 29, the world’s first AP1000 on June 30, and the FOAK of a Chinese design whose name I can’t remember also in the same time period.  Note that there’s another Chinese EPR on the way and THREE more AP1000s, which together are going to add another 4900-odd MW of nuclear to the Chinese grid beyond what’s already running.  And China will probably add a similar amount in 2019, and again in 2020, and beyond.

    The real question is, WHY does it take an authoritarian regime to build nuclear power these days (outside of Finland and the UK, which are building or planning to build quite a bit more nuclear)?  Why is the cleanest and safest source of electric generation in the world being demonized and destroyed in democracies, and ONLY in democracies?

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
  72. Anonymous[317] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mr. Rational

    Modern desalination plants use ‘pump-membrane’ technology, said to be more energy efficient.

  73. Anonymous[226] • Disclaimer says:
    @Altai

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but a significant part of China’s actual emissions are counted by the Paris Agreement as belonging to the United States (because the US consumes Chinese goods). Seems misleading.

  74. @Mr. Rational

    Why is the cleanest and safest source of electric generation in the world being demonized and destroyed in democracies, and ONLY in democracies?

    Three Mile Island

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  75. @Jim Don Bob

    You make my point for me.  The worst commercial NPP accident in the USA had… zero deaths, zero injuries.

    2010 San Bruno gas pipeline explosion?  8 dead, 58 injured.

    1963 Baldwin Hills dam collapse?  5 dead.

    1926 St. Francis dam collapse?  400+ dead.

    Coal in USA:  about 15 fatalities per TWh… that’s EVERY TWh.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Hundreds of POWs may have been left to die in Vietnam, abandoned by their government—and our media.