What a beautiful message from everyone, especially the last speaker.

Phenomenal speakers.

Hunter Lovin ~1:13:30 On 'Limits to Growth', it is important to note that the *destructive impact per person* is shown to rise dramatically since 1900. Actually, in many areas of the world, this impact began long before 1900 - while in other areas of the planet, more people at that time were still living with essentially zero negative impact *as a part of their habitat*. Today, there are only a handful of people around the globe that live in balance with the natural world. These tend to be the very people 'modern' societies dismiss as 'backward' or 'primitive'. Many more people up to and by 1900 lived in a way that their negative impact was a tiny fraction of what the average 'footprint' per person is today - especially in the 'developed' countries. --- Also, published info on the amount of food per person almost NEVER counts what people produce at home for themselves, gleaned, foraged, fished, or hunted. These sources were key to the survival of many families during the Great Depression. But along with family farms, these resources are now mostly gone (Social engineering brought people to cities & suburbs. Farmers were urged to use industrial ag practices, and not waste their time growing a garden, or having some fruit trees for the family. Pollution, habitat destruction, and other factors have wiped out or made inedible many species of fish & shellfish that long contributed to quality protien to even the poorest rural families. Even gathering abundant plants (many classified as 'weeds') for food is risky in many urban and rural areas due to pollution!) Examples of resources now gone, but seldom counted.

Let's look at lightbulbs - holistically. Is it better to use incandescent bulbs that give off quite a bit of heat, as well as light? Or is it better to use mercury flourescent bulbs (which is all flourescent bulbs, including CFBs) that take more energy to manufacture, all contain a highly toxic heavy metal, which predictably leaks from the bulbs during use, and are toxic when disposed of? Well, what's the context? In our case, we already have extensive massive mercury exposure (fish, mercury amalgam dental fillings, coal fired plants) AND live in a climate where the heat given off by incandescent bulbs is welcome at least 9 months of the year! Then there are LEDs. Has anyone done a total environmental impact study on these bulbs, from sourcing the raw materials, through manufacture, through use, and disposal? (I have not seen such a study yet, but since these bulbs are way more complex than a simple incandescent bulb, I suspect they do produce a significant burden on the eco-sphere during the raw material, manufacture, and disposal phases.)