• Jimjim@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Hmmm its got me thinking. How many mommoths does it take to fill up my car? How much biomass was it before it turned into oil?

    Like maybe 10 mammoths? Maybe just 1? Or maybe 1000?!

    Maybe we can use dead people to start making new oil? I mean, grave yards usually take up very valuable real estate anyway, and they are growing in size exponentially all the time. We need to start being realistic about the dead. How long does it take for someone to turn into gas anyway? Like 1000 years?

      • Jimjim@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Oh?? Well how many trees does it take to fill up my car? Like is it like 1000 trees, and half a mommoth? Maybe 100,000 fully mature 50 foot tall trees? Im very curious about this now…

      • Jimjim@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        40 minutes ago

        Dinosaurs didn’t really contribute much

        I guess maybe not by comparison, but imagine all the millions of years and millions of generations of gaint (and small) dinosaurs that lived lived and died. Thats a Hella Lotta biomass biodegrading.

    • Eq0@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Your use of the word “exponentially” triggered my inner math teacher: no, the growth is not exponential but more than linear since the industrial revolution.

      • Jimjim@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Is it not exponential? Dont human births exponentially increase? And if thats the case, dont death increase exponentially?

        Or am I wrong about births too?

        • thevoidzero@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          If a couple have 2 children, then in an ideal condition the population is constant, so the death/birth is linear. Human birth can be exponentially if every couple have more than 2 children and they also have more than 2 and so on in this ideal scenario with no early deaths.

          In reality you need 2+some fraction to balance out the early deaths, other couples with no children, unmarried, etc.

          Plus with limited resources, population can’t grow a lot because you’ll start having a lot of death due to starvation, conflicts, accidents, etc.

          Problem is due to industrialization, we can now support higher number of humans compared to the past, and due to vaccines and medicines we have smaller numbers of early deaths, so we have a population growth problem. But as we hit our limits it’ll stabilize, or if we overshoot, it’ll go down.

          • Eq0@literature.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 minutes ago

            There is an additional element to it: along human history the birth rate has been usually significantly higher than 2, but that was compensated by a significantly higher death rate too. So the number of deaths definitely did not increase a huge lot over the last hundred years.