<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Australia&#8217;s day of population reckoning</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.crispinhull.com.au/2010/01/30/australias-day-of-population-reckoning/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.crispinhull.com.au/2010/01/30/australias-day-of-population-reckoning/</link>
	<description>Journalism and other writing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 06:41:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greg D</title>
		<link>http://www.crispinhull.com.au/2010/01/30/australias-day-of-population-reckoning/comment-page-1/#comment-383</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 20:58:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crispinhull.com.au/?p=9519#comment-383</guid>
		<description>You hit the nail right on the head, Crispin.  When are our supposed political representatives going to listen to the masses.  This surge in our population is lining the pockets of those in big business who are then using these funds to effectively &quot;bribe&quot; the major political parties into supporting high population growth.  The ordinary person is the loser in this surge in population.

Lindsay Tanner suggests we need high immigration to supply us with doctors and engineers.  So we have to rely on the skills of developing economies to support our economy.  Why can&#039;t we train our own people to do these jobs?

I am frustrated with the political process.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You hit the nail right on the head, Crispin.  When are our supposed political representatives going to listen to the masses.  This surge in our population is lining the pockets of those in big business who are then using these funds to effectively &#8220;bribe&#8221; the major political parties into supporting high population growth.  The ordinary person is the loser in this surge in population.</p>
<p>Lindsay Tanner suggests we need high immigration to supply us with doctors and engineers.  So we have to rely on the skills of developing economies to support our economy.  Why can&#8217;t we train our own people to do these jobs?</p>
<p>I am frustrated with the political process.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ian Clark</title>
		<link>http://www.crispinhull.com.au/2010/01/30/australias-day-of-population-reckoning/comment-page-1/#comment-382</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Clark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 07:40:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crispinhull.com.au/?p=9519#comment-382</guid>
		<description>Excellent piece, and so refreshing after “more customers can only be good” approach to this problem that is already dominating what we see every day around us.  It is bad enough  it is the whole tenor of the CT Business section, but at least it isn’t the whole newspapers as per News Ltd.   It is so encouraging that your editor passed it.  GPSO in action, perhaps.

I’m pleased you used food production as an example.  I’m writing to suggest another aspect of food supplies if you ever get the chance to expand on this theme.  It is how future limited petroleum will further impinge on them.  Not the obvious examples of fuel for large tractors, harvesters, and transport vehicles, since can all (dimly) visualise electric tractors, harvesters and (less dimly) transport so long as we don’t dwell too long on where all the electricity might come from.  

The thing you could focus on in another piece on food is the Haber Process.  (Forgive me if the following is old hat to you: I have to take this gamble.)  Without it agriculture would have wound down as mined saltpetre, and thus nitrogenous fertilisers, eg ammonium salts, were unprocurable in commercial amounts.  And bingo, Malthus would have been right, then and there.  With the Haber Process we can fix more and more nitrogen on demand, for as long as natural gas (supplies the hydrogen better than the original coke did) is freely available and affordable.  But it has many uses, and many are competing for it.   China was very keen to get its hands on $50B if it recently from WA, mostly, I gather, for the nitrogen fixation that high yield rice and wheat fields depend on.

No doubt the nitrogenous fertiliser industry would love to give up the Haber Process (because of its dependence on petroleum) and rush to something better.  The problem is that nothing is on the horizon.  As petroleum, liquid and gas, get more expensive, so too will affordable nitrogenous fertiliser on the scale required.  Food grown using it will become more expensive, and countries that can’t afford it will see their yields go down, big time, at the very time they need more food.

What is needed is a way to isolate hydrogen on a massive scale and link it with nitrogen, also on a massive scale, without roaring through fossil fuel to do it.  It is hard to be optimistic about this happening.  Hydroelectrolysis, in theory, but needs truly buckets of energy, dominating its other uses.

So every time we read of petroleum supplies diminishing, we should think of the consequences of worn-out saltpetre mines that fossil fuel, plus the ingenuity of Haber (and Bosch, with whom he shared the Nobel Prize, essentially for deferring Malthus’s prediction) saved us from.  And watch what agricultural yields and prices do in response to oil and gas prices, and availability.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent piece, and so refreshing after “more customers can only be good” approach to this problem that is already dominating what we see every day around us.  It is bad enough  it is the whole tenor of the CT Business section, but at least it isn’t the whole newspapers as per News Ltd.   It is so encouraging that your editor passed it.  GPSO in action, perhaps.</p>
<p>I’m pleased you used food production as an example.  I’m writing to suggest another aspect of food supplies if you ever get the chance to expand on this theme.  It is how future limited petroleum will further impinge on them.  Not the obvious examples of fuel for large tractors, harvesters, and transport vehicles, since can all (dimly) visualise electric tractors, harvesters and (less dimly) transport so long as we don’t dwell too long on where all the electricity might come from.  </p>
<p>The thing you could focus on in another piece on food is the Haber Process.  (Forgive me if the following is old hat to you: I have to take this gamble.)  Without it agriculture would have wound down as mined saltpetre, and thus nitrogenous fertilisers, eg ammonium salts, were unprocurable in commercial amounts.  And bingo, Malthus would have been right, then and there.  With the Haber Process we can fix more and more nitrogen on demand, for as long as natural gas (supplies the hydrogen better than the original coke did) is freely available and affordable.  But it has many uses, and many are competing for it.   China was very keen to get its hands on $50B if it recently from WA, mostly, I gather, for the nitrogen fixation that high yield rice and wheat fields depend on.</p>
<p>No doubt the nitrogenous fertiliser industry would love to give up the Haber Process (because of its dependence on petroleum) and rush to something better.  The problem is that nothing is on the horizon.  As petroleum, liquid and gas, get more expensive, so too will affordable nitrogenous fertiliser on the scale required.  Food grown using it will become more expensive, and countries that can’t afford it will see their yields go down, big time, at the very time they need more food.</p>
<p>What is needed is a way to isolate hydrogen on a massive scale and link it with nitrogen, also on a massive scale, without roaring through fossil fuel to do it.  It is hard to be optimistic about this happening.  Hydroelectrolysis, in theory, but needs truly buckets of energy, dominating its other uses.</p>
<p>So every time we read of petroleum supplies diminishing, we should think of the consequences of worn-out saltpetre mines that fossil fuel, plus the ingenuity of Haber (and Bosch, with whom he shared the Nobel Prize, essentially for deferring Malthus’s prediction) saved us from.  And watch what agricultural yields and prices do in response to oil and gas prices, and availability.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Susan Nancarrow</title>
		<link>http://www.crispinhull.com.au/2010/01/30/australias-day-of-population-reckoning/comment-page-1/#comment-381</link>
		<dc:creator>Susan Nancarrow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 03:12:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crispinhull.com.au/?p=9519#comment-381</guid>
		<description>Another excellent article Crispin. You have been a voice in the wilderness on this issue for some time but it does seem like the tide is turning. It all comes down to Population, population, population!
Susan Nancarrow</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another excellent article Crispin. You have been a voice in the wilderness on this issue for some time but it does seem like the tide is turning. It all comes down to Population, population, population!<br />
Susan Nancarrow</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Gardner</title>
		<link>http://www.crispinhull.com.au/2010/01/30/australias-day-of-population-reckoning/comment-page-1/#comment-380</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Gardner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 13:00:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crispinhull.com.au/?p=9519#comment-380</guid>
		<description>Very appropriate essay as we enter February, the month of Global Population Speak Out. So, thanks for speaking out. I found this line to be particularly salient:

&quot;You do not need a large population to have high average incomes and standard of living. You only need it for a few people to be disproportionately wealthy.&quot;

I suggest, in fact, that a large population is more likely to lower real incomes and standard of living. Yet the myth of the growth bonanza lives on. Around the world we must continue to raise the volume on logic and fact about overpopulation.

Dave Gardner
Producing the documentary
Hooked on Growth: Our Misguided Quest for Prosperity</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very appropriate essay as we enter February, the month of Global Population Speak Out. So, thanks for speaking out. I found this line to be particularly salient:</p>
<p>&#8220;You do not need a large population to have high average incomes and standard of living. You only need it for a few people to be disproportionately wealthy.&#8221;</p>
<p>I suggest, in fact, that a large population is more likely to lower real incomes and standard of living. Yet the myth of the growth bonanza lives on. Around the world we must continue to raise the volume on logic and fact about overpopulation.</p>
<p>Dave Gardner<br />
Producing the documentary<br />
Hooked on Growth: Our Misguided Quest for Prosperity</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ruth</title>
		<link>http://www.crispinhull.com.au/2010/01/30/australias-day-of-population-reckoning/comment-page-1/#comment-376</link>
		<dc:creator>Ruth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 04:20:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.crispinhull.com.au/?p=9519#comment-376</guid>
		<description>Congratulations Crispin on your thoughtful analysis of what is shaping up to be the issue of the century - nationally and globally.  I recall a ?CSIRO report that to feed the world&#039;s growing population we would need to produce as much  food in the next 50 years, as we have produced since the start of recorded history.  The problem with the current debate is that that the growth lobby constructs population growth as a given, beyond our control, when they are the instigators of Australia&#039;s massive immigration program.  The 7:30 Report Special was a refreshing change - but that panel discussion got highjacked into the circular &#039;we need to plan better so we can build more so we can squeeze in more people in, so we need to plan better....&#039;    Pity you weren&#039;t on the panel Crispin.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Congratulations Crispin on your thoughtful analysis of what is shaping up to be the issue of the century &#8211; nationally and globally.  I recall a ?CSIRO report that to feed the world&#8217;s growing population we would need to produce as much  food in the next 50 years, as we have produced since the start of recorded history.  The problem with the current debate is that that the growth lobby constructs population growth as a given, beyond our control, when they are the instigators of Australia&#8217;s massive immigration program.  The 7:30 Report Special was a refreshing change &#8211; but that panel discussion got highjacked into the circular &#8216;we need to plan better so we can build more so we can squeeze in more people in, so we need to plan better&#8230;.&#8217;    Pity you weren&#8217;t on the panel Crispin.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
