/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10022682
>Once they get to a certain threshold, a majority of the public will push to mitigate those externalities.
he said, fighting tooth and nail against attempts to mitigate those externalities. you realize that's exactly what emissions controls do, right?
your argument is that we don't need to do anything about pollution because if it gets really bad we'll do something about pollution.

>The temperature rises a couple degrees and WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE OMG
your inability to understand something doesn't make it false.

>Commercial fertilizers are derived from minerals, not plants.
phosphate fertilizers, sure. nitrate fertilizers, not so much. can't grow plants other than legumes without nitrates.
also, do you think we've just got an infinite supply of minerals or something?
>Hydroponics you fool.
which requires even MORE resource input and is only suitable for certain types of crop. there's a reason it's only widely adopted in places where soil isn't available.

>The reason fish get fed fish meal is because fish meal is cheap
aaand because it's high in protein and fats, which fish need a lot of.
>If that supply runs down, you bet your ass a vegetable-based alternative will be marketed.
vegetables are poor in protein and fats. marine food webs are entirely different from terrestrial ones. with few exceptions, fish can't be effectively raised on vegetable matter.
>Innovation follows demand.
there's loads of demand for free energy. hasn't happened yet. there are limits to what innovation can do.