Zambia Faces a Climate-Induced Energy Crisis (apnews.com) 103
Zambia has the largest man-made lake in the world, reports the Associated Press — but a severe drought has left the lake's 128-meter-high (420-feet) dam wall "almost completely exposed". This leaves Kariba dam without enough water to run most of its hydroelectric turbines — meaning millions of people in Zambia now face "a climate-induced energy crisis..."
The water level is so low that only one of the six turbines on Zambia's side of the dam is able to operate, cutting generation to less than 10% of normal output. Zambia relies on the dam for more than 80% of its national electricity supply, and the result is Zambians have barely a few hours of power a day at the best of times. Often, areas are going without electricity for days... The power crisis is a bigger blow to the economy and the battle against poverty than the lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic, said Zambia Association of Manufacturers president Ashu Sagar.
Africa contributes the least to global warming but is the most vulnerable continent to extreme weather events and climate change as poor countries can't meet the high financials costs of adapting. This year's drought in southern Africa is the worst in decades and has parched crops and left millions hungry, causing Zambia and others to already declare national disasters and ask for aid...
Zambia is not alone in that hydroelectric power makes up over 80% of the energy mix in Mozambique, Malawi, Uganda, Ethiopia and Congo, even as experts warn it will become more unreliable. "Extreme weather patterns, including prolonged droughts, make it clear that overreliance on hydro is no longer sustainable," said Carlos Lopes, a professor at the Mandela School of Public Governance at the University of Cape Town in South Africa.
While the lake's water level normally rises six meters after it rains, "It moved by less than 30 centimeters after the last rainy season barely materialized, authorities said...
"Experts say there's also no guarantee those rains will come and it's dangerous to rely on a changing climate given Zambia has had drought-induced power problems before, and the trend is they are getting worse."
Africa contributes the least to global warming but is the most vulnerable continent to extreme weather events and climate change as poor countries can't meet the high financials costs of adapting. This year's drought in southern Africa is the worst in decades and has parched crops and left millions hungry, causing Zambia and others to already declare national disasters and ask for aid...
Zambia is not alone in that hydroelectric power makes up over 80% of the energy mix in Mozambique, Malawi, Uganda, Ethiopia and Congo, even as experts warn it will become more unreliable. "Extreme weather patterns, including prolonged droughts, make it clear that overreliance on hydro is no longer sustainable," said Carlos Lopes, a professor at the Mandela School of Public Governance at the University of Cape Town in South Africa.
While the lake's water level normally rises six meters after it rains, "It moved by less than 30 centimeters after the last rainy season barely materialized, authorities said...
"Experts say there's also no guarantee those rains will come and it's dangerous to rely on a changing climate given Zambia has had drought-induced power problems before, and the trend is they are getting worse."
CO2 and population (Score:3, Insightful)
No doubt global warming (..err climate change) is a big factor in Africaâ(TM)s ability to support the environment and the people, flora and fauna of the continent. But the population growth rate is the biggest factor IMHO. The population pyramid of Zambia is a recipe for suffering.
World populations need to reduce to some sustainable level. Not by 007 moonraker villain methods, but incentivizing , family planning, birth control, etc. much better to invest in birth control in high growth rate areas than another carbon recapture screen.
With current tech a planet stabilized around 5-6 billion people is eminently supportable economically , environmentally, and with a high standard of living for all.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
While true, it is not going to happen without a massive catastrophe. First, you have to get all the religious assholes under control, that deeply desire more victims for their deranged hallucinations, and hence are massively opposed to all forms of population control. The more, the better, and who cares if they suffer. And something like 80% of the planet's population are listening to them in one form or another. Second, you have to get people to accept the fact, blatantly obvious though it is, that 8B is a
Re: (Score:2)
While true, it is not going to happen without a massive catastrophe.
100% this.
I'd argue the catastrophe already started. We just don't realize it yet.
The geographical regions which are sliding towards being barely inhabitable are, incidentally, the regions with the highest population density. I'm talking about China, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, large swaths of Africa, South-Eastern Asia. Also incidentally, the largest (by population) countries in these regions are also nuclear powers.
This will not end well.
Re: (Score:2)
While true, it is not going to happen without a massive catastrophe.
100% this.
I'd argue the catastrophe already started. We just don't realize it yet. The geographical regions which are sliding towards being barely inhabitable are, incidentally, the regions with the highest population density. I'm talking about China, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, large swaths of Africa, South-Eastern Asia. Also incidentally, the largest (by population) countries in these regions are also nuclear powers.
This will not end well.
in agreement, India has added almost two USA's worth of population in around 20 years.
23 years - $4 billion aid from USA (Score:2)
Zambia might need to explain how the more than 4 billion US dollars in foreign aid since 2001 did not help prevent this situation.
https://foreignassistance.gov/... [foreignassistance.gov]
It's likely much higher since this is USA only and would need to add in the UN, EU, and other countries/regions/NGOs.
Blaming this on repeated revolutions, tribal wars, ... does not make it go away?
Where and what was done with the 4 billion US dollars in aid? What about aid from other countries/agencies?
Re: (Score:2)
Zambia might need to explain how the more than 4 billion US dollars in foreign aid since 2001 did not help prevent this situation.
https://foreignassistance.gov/... [foreignassistance.gov]
It's likely much higher since this is USA only and would need to add in the UN, EU, and other countries/regions/NGOs.
Blaming this on repeated revolutions, tribal wars, ... does not make it go away?
Where and what was done with the 4 billion US dollars in aid? What about aid from other countries/agencies?
Exactly. While it make some people feel really good about themselves, as in " I am a caring person, look at how much money I demand be sent to help out all of these poor people, and if anyone is against it, they are horrible people. Some even claiming that the US is the cause of these nations poverty, therefore obligated.
Virtue signaling, and extra virtue if in a country that doesn't send a penny, because now you not only show how much you care, but you can demand other countries send their money.
Hey
Re: (Score:2)
While true, it is not going to happen without a massive catastrophe.
in agreement, India has added almost two USA's worth of population in around 20 years.
You can stop worrying about overpopulation in India, as they've already fallen below the replacement rate of 2.1 [nikkei.com]. As the linked article indicates, Indians are now trying to figure out how to avoid the depopulation problems now plaguing Japan and increasingly, China.
Re: (Score:2)
While true, it is not going to happen without a massive catastrophe.
100% this.
I'd argue the catastrophe already started. We just don't realize it yet.
I do realize it every day. But most of the human race has not, agreed.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, if the human race collectively was rational, this planet would be a good place for almost everybody and basically forever. But, collectively, the human race fails even to meet low standards of rationality, like accepting extremely obvious things. Hence this is, urgently needed as it is, is not going to happen.
In addition to that which you outlined, as the western world ages itself out of the picture, a pretty clever option for a new group wishing to take over is intensive, prolific breeding
What are a near end of life 85 year olds going to do against an army of 20 year olds?
Re: (Score:2)
That is more of an SF plot, not something to be expected.
Re: (Score:2)
That is more of an SF plot, not something to be expected.
Wait until we die, then just walk in.
Re: (Score:2)
So in, say, 1000 years? Not a factor. The population in the west is shrinking, but it is not shrinking fast.
Re: (Score:2)
Religious arseholes can be overcome, e.g. Bangladesh has gone from over 6 in the early 70s to around 2.1 now, mostly through education and empowering women.
The real issue is that developed nations are obsessed with economic growth forever, and a growing population has always been one of the main ways that has happened. We need to develop new economic models that can work with a slowly shrinking and ageing population.
Solve that and population management becomes much easier.
Re: (Score:2)
No doubt global warming (..err climate change) is a big factor in Africaâ(TM)s ability to support the environment and the people, flora and fauna of the continent. But the population growth rate is the biggest factor IMHO. The population pyramid of Zambia is a recipe for suffering.
While I actually agree with you, I do want to point out that Africa has half [worldatlas.com] the population density of Europe. So population clearly isn't the only factor.
World populations need to reduce to some sustainable level. Not by 007 moonraker villain methods, but incentivizing , family planning, birth control, etc. much better to invest in birth control in high growth rate areas than another carbon recapture screen.
Agree.
Re: (Score:2)
While I actually agree with you, I do want to point out that Africa has half [worldatlas.com] the population density of Europe. So population clearly isn't the only factor.
Population density isn't actually a relevant metric in the slightest. There are many metrics for judging how resilient a population is, but judging land is pointless. One needs to look at how the social structure is built around the population, and one of the best metrics for that is GDP since even looking after your own citizens without exporting anything is reflected in that figure.
For that you can compare the 20million people of Zambia with their $1,497 USD / capita GDP to the Netherlands 18.9 million pe
Re: (Score:2)
World populations need to reduce to some sustainable level
It is already happening. If you look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] most of the world is already below replacement rate. The biggest problems are in Africa, and of the countries listed, only Nigeria has major troubles ahead (the other countries also have high fertility rates, but Nigeria also has a base population of 200+ million - the others are much smaller).
The current fertility rate of the entire world is just a bit over 2 at this point, an
Re: (Score:2)
World populations need to reduce to some sustainable level
It is already happening. If you look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] most of the world is already below replacement rate. The biggest problems are in Africa, and of the countries listed, only Nigeria has major troubles ahead (the other countries also have high fertility rates, but Nigeria also has a base population of 200+ million - the others are much smaller).
The current fertility rate of the entire world is just a bit over 2 at this point, and projected to decrease even further.
Better check out India. As noted before, they have added around 2 USA populations in the last 20 years. Yet we still hear about how we're cutting way back on breeding
Re: (Score:2)
Now, if only some smart white people could come up with some kind of pseudo-scientific "solutions" to this problem & make the world a better place... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] Of course, it'd all need to be administered by people who are racially & morally superior to maintain the "natural order of things." You know, maybe someone like Jan Smuts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Poe's law says I have
Re: (Score:2)
why a continent that is so rich in such a wide variety of natural resources is so impoverished
That's easy. White people developed the best weapons at the time, and had the worst diseases to spread.
I think rather than the racist construct, it had a lot more to do with things like religion.
Re: (Score:2)
That's easy. people living in those countries that got less sun and developed due to evolution paler coloured skin developed the best weapons at the time, and had the worst diseases to spread.
Happy now?
I'm almost always happy. And that pisses a lot of people off! 8^)
it had a lot more to do with things like religion.
Blaming all the violence on religion works 2.
Combination of both then.
Yup, some religions are peaceful, some get co-opted by people who desire to force everyone else into their religions. Man makes God in his own image.
Now I'm as atheistic as can be, but imagine if most people worshipped Ganesha. That's what a god should be like.
Re: (Score:1)
Actually, Africa's resources tend to demand you've already climbed a rather brutal tech ladder (generally inaccessible to people in Africa) to even access, much less use. Starting with bronze (copper + something else, usually tin; Those two are never found together, and so you need a large trade network on top of that). And so they haven't had the opportunity to invent much of their own.
Also, Africa has bugs that will fubar both you and the horse you rode in on. Not to mention empires. Europe has its own
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, of course! The problem is always because there's too many brown people, right?!
Damn my man, This is math, not race or eugenics. Most sorry you feel that way.
But since your triggered to the point of calling someone that believes race is a social construct, let us not deal with the great white satan, and go to a different country where racists call the occupants Asians, sub race Japanese.
In Japan, they are experiencing an advanced form of what the USA is starting. They are getting much older on average. They are now depopulating about half a percent a year. And as the demograph
Re: (Score:1)
& triggered? I didn't say anything about social constructs. What I'm talking about is the ol' fashioned white supremacism & eugenics that were popular during the British empire. Did you even t
Re: (Score:2)
Well maybe they should get in the game then. Are they even trying?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Indians & Africans don't "roll coal," fly everywhere, keep whole "McMansions" below 20C in the Arizona dessert, build everything so far apart that you have to have a car to live, make enormous cars with poor mileage, etc.. If you want to reduce CO2 emissions more effectively, try starting closer to home.
Are you seriously so racist that you believe that the things you blame those you consider "white" are the only people doin what you use to claim that it is a good reason to hate "white" people?
You dear sir, are an extreme racist. I don't like racists, and I don't like you. Congratulations. There are very few people I don't like, so you are in an elite group.
You may have the last word, racist - I believe that is very important to you.
Re: (Score:1)
BTW, most of the worst offenders for CO2 emissions per capita are on the Arabian peninsula. Does that make me racist AND Islamophobic to point that out? Or perhaps you want to start the formerly suggested (not by me) eugenics programmes there?
I'm not the one proposing eugenics programmes on people in Africa, India, or anywhere else.
Re: (Score:2)
Better check out India. Yet we still hear about how we're cutting way back on breeding
indian indians will replace us americans just like us americans replaced american indians, except lawfully and peacefully. i see no problem?
they have added around 2 USA populations in the last 20 years.
how much is that in libraries of congress?
Re: (Score:2)
Better check out India. Yet we still hear about how we're cutting way back on breeding
indian indians will replace us americans just like us americans replaced american indians, except lawfully and peacefully. i see no problem?
they have added around 2 USA populations in the last 20 years.
how much is that in libraries of congress?
They are too busy making new Indians to read.
Re: CO2 and population (Score:2)
The best way to reduce population growth in a place like that is to reduce child mortality and to introduce family planning option.
But in the current economic situation os most of africa, it won't happen without injection of resources (dollars, infrastructure, training) from the rest of the world.
Re: (Score:2)
The best way to reduce population growth in a place like that is to reduce child mortality and to introduce family planning option. But in the current economic situation os most of africa, it won't happen without injection of resources (dollars, infrastructure, training) from the rest of the world.
Isn't it amazing that whatever the problem is in that part of the world , the fix is always giving them a lot of money. It's like the third world version of trickle down economics, and works just as well - not.
Re: (Score:2)
you might have missed the news but back in, oh, i dunno, maybe in the the 1920's (bc) we developed this thing called "currency" where we don't actually have to figure out how many loaves of bread it costs to get a sheep and so forth. it can be exchanged for goods and services as what nerds call "a medium of exchange".
And the cool thing about money is it is a lot more fungible than rice or goats. And that fungible nature makes it a lot easier to skim or outright take the money, with it never going to those who need it.
Many of these cases of stopping aid (and by the UN - not the US) are because the money seems to disappear, When that happens, it is because it is going into the hands of people that intercept and steal it.
Take it up with the UN.
Re: (Score:2)
You know if you send an army over there to reduce their population it also takes money right? Even just bombing them takes money. What's your "no money" solution? It's hopes and prayers isn't it?
I hope and pray you get the balls to post under your pseudonym.
Nah - the amazing thing is that you AC posters have guts when you post. Internet muscles are the sign of the weakest people on earth.
Re: (Score:2)
With current tech a planet stabilized around 5-6 billion people is eminently supportable economically , environmentally, and with a high standard of living for all.
So they can have first world standards for 6 billion people? Every one of us? I'm a bit skeptical
Re: CO2 and population (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I believe there are 2 main factors. One is population the other is per capita consumption, both play an important role, I believe developed nations produce 50 times the CO2 per capita than developing nations, even if we halved poor population and we tried for equity we are all still screwed.
We also need to stop consuming as much as we can in the name of economic growth because any gains we get from population drop we will quickly consume.
I think the consumption part is the hard part, we are already heading
Re: (Score:2)
No doubt global warming (..err climate change) is a big factor in Africaâ(TM)s ability to support the environment and the people, flora and fauna of the continent. But the population growth rate is the biggest factor IMHO. The population pyramid of Zambia is a recipe for suffering.
The current drought has removed 72% of Zambia's electricity supply. If the population were smaller, there would still be a huge problem. The biggest problem isn't population, but rather that the electricity supply has decreased by 72%! That's the biggest factor.
Global warming is a problem. Increasing sea levels, increasing hurricanes, increasing tornadoes, increasing drought, increasing floods. This is not a population problem. It's a global warming problem. Whether this problem is recognized politic
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with over-consumption of resources is not the population of Africa but is the rich first world.
The rich first world consumes 10 times the resources of the poor third world.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you believe that population growth is a problem when countries which have lowered their birthrate - like the UK - have seen social unrest driven by the immigration necessary to support their socialist ambitions?
The overwhelming majority of countries in the world with socialized medicine are now facing the crisis of plummeting birthrates, and have started welcoming immigrants because they don't have enough workers/tax base to support their aging populations. And of course, the clash of cultures be
No long-term planning (Score:3)
That has a tendency to bite a society hard. It has been pretty clear what is coming for about 40 years now.
Re: (Score:2)
Trust gweihir to be victim blaming, despite TFS explicitly pointing out that adapting to this change costs money that these countries simply don't have.
Re: (Score:3)
Trust gweihir to be victim blaming, despite TFS explicitly pointing out that adapting to this change costs money that these countries simply don't have.
In 2013 to 2018, the US sent nearly 300 Billion dollars of foreign aid - half to Africa. https://www.forbes.com/sites/a... [forbes.com]
Tell us - how much money will we need to send? I think the answer is "how much money do we have?"
It is a serious question. Would 5 trillion a year fix the problem>
Re: (Score:1)
Tell us - how much money will we need to send?
None. You're asking the wrong question. How about instead of sending a bit of money to a continent (tell us again how much you sent to Zambia directly), how about you do something to address the fundamental source of the problem instead and stop competing with Canada and Australia to be the biggest western douche-nozzles on this list https://www.worldometers.info/... [worldometers.info]
Re: (Score:2)
Tell us - how much money will we need to send?
None. You're asking the wrong question. How about instead of sending a bit of money to a continent (tell us again how much you sent to Zambia directly), how about you do something to address the fundamental source of the problem instead and stop competing with Canada and Australia to be the biggest western douche-nozzles on this list https://www.worldometers.info/... [worldometers.info]
We should give them all our money, then bitch and moan about how we need money to become like they are. Problem solved - I'm 100 percent certain if we reverse the situation, they will cheerfully help us out.
Now, in seriousness, I have no issues with sending help to less fortunate. But we've so often seen that the money never makes it to the people who would need it. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/w... [pbs.org] as one example. There are more.. https://www.reuters.com/world/... [reuters.com]
https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2023/03/1
Re: (Score:1)
You must know that would cost even more money than the crumbs you're spending on them now?
Precisely the reason they don't. Our Highly Esteemed Leaders are putting money over evulz.
Re: (Score:2)
Afghanistan received $6 billion in U.S. foreign aid in FY2018, the most of any country in the world, with Israel the runner up at $3 billion.
That's not Africa...
That's not my quote either
Re: (Score:2)
It's only fair that the countries which contributed most to climate change also contribute to mitigating the effects of it.
It's also important for our own futures, as we need developing nations to adopt clean energy rather than just doing whatever is cheapest regardless of the CO2 emission consequences. If they follow the path we did then we are all screwed. That's also why it's important for us to decarbonize, even places like the UK that only contribute about 1% of global emissions. If we don't demonstrat
Re: (Score:2)
Somebody that is not planning for entirely expected things is not a "victim".
The problem is not the climate, its planning (Score:3)
"Zambia relies on the dam for more than 80% of its national electricity supply"
There you have the problem. The planning did not take account the variability of the weather over a period of years or decades. They have produced intermittency, by trying to get more out of their hydro storage than was prudent.
If you are going to use intermittent sources of electricity, you have to be able to deliver supply through the periodic low points. Can be wind, with one or two week calms, can be solar, with overnight total outage, can be hydro, in which case you are limited by rainfall and its highs and lows.
It was fine to use hydro, it was even fine not to have anything else, as long as they kept within safe limits of their drawdown of the hydro. But demand is obviously too high for the system, so they are stuck with three choices:
-- install more hydro
-- install conventional, gas or coal
-- have blackouts
Their problems are due to climate, not climate change, and to having relied on weather dependent generation without planning for intermittency.
Re: (Score:1)
Their problems are due to climate, not climate change,
A climate that hasn't caused a problem to date and yet now has started to is a result of what? I'll give you a hint the word starts with "change" and ends with the dreadful realisation that you just wrote something monumentally silly.
Re: The problem is not the climate, its planning (Score:2)
Choice 4: Install solar. And maybe wind, but mainly lots of solar.
Solar is really cheap these days, but it's intermittent without storage. A hydroelectric dam that can't provide power constantly is a huge energy storage vessel. Solar works best in a sunny drought; hydro best when it's cloudy and rainy. They were made for each other!
Zero contributions but also zero technological dev (Score:3, Interesting)
"Africa contributes the least to global warming"
Well, they also contribute the least to technological progress. You can't single out just the cost and forget the benefit. Africans have some 200 000-400 000 years headstart compared to Europeans and others but haven't made any technological progress since stone tools. How many children died during these hundreds of thousands of years for reasons that were avoidable if the Africans had achieved the same level of development non-Africans done the last 10 000-50 000 years?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That is just a lame excuse. Africa is 3 times bigger than Europe, and half of Europe was covered with ice 10 000 years ago. Egypt was the bread basket of the Roman empire. The Mediterranean is equally accessible from both Europe and Africa. The Bay of Biscaye is known for its storms and Caesar lost a fleet in England to the tide. The Netherlands became a leading seafaring nation despite the land was more or less below water. How is that for suitable harbours? Where in Europe can you have agriculture without
Re: (Score:2)
You have no idea what makes a good harbour before excavators appeared.
Re: (Score:2)
I have. You could look up how Amsterdam was built, for example.
Re: (Score:1)
Europe has navigable rivers, which is why so many cities are positioned along those rivers.
All those wars did push for innovation. And eventually ocean-going ships that allowed for exploration and colonization. And import of not just spices, but also technologies. In one word: Trade.
As for those forests, can I interest you in words like "timber"? "Lumber"? "Woodwork"? Chop down a bunch of trees for lumber, burn the remaining rubble, and you have ready-fertilized topsoil.
Add seasons (one of which allo
Re: (Score:2)
Which important cities? That is, important 2000 years ago? 4000 years ago?
"one of which allows absolutely nothing to grow"
So does Europe has advantageous climate for agriculture or not? You are cherry picking. Yes, Europeans learned to plan because they had to, but the reason for that wasn't that life in Europe was easy, the reason was that life in Europe was *hard*. Africans had access to surplus in a way Europeans didn't.
Re: (Score:1)
"one of which allows absolutely nothing to grow"
So does Europe has advantageous climate for agriculture or not? You are cherry picking.
Reading comprehension and a half right there.
In the context of Europe, those seasons are winter, spring, summer and fall. Winter being the season where absolutely nothing grows, cos it's COLD.
And since nothing grows in winter, all you have that you can eat, has to be stored surplus from previous harvest. ONE harvest per year, that needs to last AT LEAST until next fall. Because on top of that, those plants need time to grow enough to be edible. (Those LARPers at CHAZ didn't seem to have picked up on th
Re:Zero contributions but also zero technological (Score:5, Insightful)
Wakanda is what should have happened, but it didn't.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
That book attempts to explain why, and I don't know the current state of the debate.
Re: (Score:2)
Africans have some 200 000-400 000 years headstart compared to Europeans and others but haven't made any technological progress since stone tools.
In that context Europeans are Africans.
Re: (Score:2)
In that context Europeans are Africans.
Which is exactly what I pointed out in https://slashdot.org/comments.... [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:1)
That is just nonsense.
Africa had dozens of high developed empires over the last 2000 to 3000 years. Even older if you go to Egyptian times.
Africa is full with the ruins of their constructions.
Many got destroyed by slave trade, others by wars or climate change.
Then came the colonizations.
It is just not taught in western schools.
Because Caesar and Napoleon and Washington are more important.
Re: (Score:2)
No they hadn't. Please list them. Besides Egypt there are only cultures that originated on the other side of the Mediterranean, e.g., Phoenicians in Carthage. Cultures such as "Kingdom of Kongo" are later than the Vikings (!!).
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, they had.
If you do not want to google it.
UP TO YOU.
I do not do your leg work to prove a point to an ignorant.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't google YOUR sources. When you claim something, you have the burden of proof. You can't prove non-existence.
Re: (Score:2)
Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel covered this some time ago.
Brief summary:
Europe had a more favorable climate for agriculture, domesticable animals, and natural resources, which allowed for the rise of complex societies, technological innovation, and political centralization. Africa, by contrast, had more challenging environments, with vast deserts, dense jungles, and fewer easily domesticable species, hindering similar development.
Re: (Score:1)
Also, the Eurasian continent orients east-west. So you can go, say, 5000 miles east, and find that not only are the trees largely the same, but the same technologies are still relevant. Such as agriculture.
This extra landmass gives extra population to be able to innovate and spread new tech. They don't even need to be conscious that this is what they're doing.
North-south oriented continents like America, not so much. Africa, even less.
Re: (Score:2)
That is a BS hypothesis. Egypt was the breadbasket of the Roman Empire. The reason the Mongols failed to conquer Europe was that the landscape was completely different in Europe (forest) compared to central Asia (steppe), despite being on the same latitude. Europe has mostly coastal climate, central Asia has inland climate.
Which animals originates in Europe?
There is a reason the human race appeared in Africa and not in Europe or Asia.
Stop excusing Africans for being lazy. **EVEN** if they had a 10 % worse s
Re: (Score:2)
"Africa contributes the least to global warming"
Well, they also contribute the least to technological progress. You can't single out just the cost and forget the benefit. Africans have some 200 000-400 000 years headstart compared to Europeans and others but haven't made any technological progress since stone tools. How many children died during these hundreds of thousands of years for reasons that were avoidable if the Africans had achieved the same level of development non-Africans done the last 10 000-50 000 years?
A huge amount of raw materials in your "technology" is from Africa. There are many engineers in Africa making sure that your supply chains of materials is well satiated.
Do you really contribute to technology? Rather than just exploiting technology to make some money.
Re: (Score:2)
Raw material is not what makes a country rich. Look at today's Nobel prize. Britain didn't have a lot of raw materials but still managed to be the starting ground for the industrial revolution. Switzerland doesn't have harbours nor raw materials but is the wealthiest country in Europe. The same goes for Japan.
See this World Bank report:
https://web.archive.org/web/20... [archive.org]
"WHERE IS THE Wealth of NATIONS?"
"FOREWORD
This volume asks a key question: Where is the Wealth of Nations?
Answering this question yields impo
Re: (Score:2)
The past is not indicative of the future. Anything can happen. You mention Nobel prize, every recipient seems like an anomaly.
In the entire history of humanity, the richest being the ones with most natural resources was probably the norm.
Re: (Score:2)
No, not at all. Africa has way more natural resources than Europe. Rome was successful not because Italy has a lot of raw materials but because the state of Rome was very efficient.
So... (Score:4, Informative)
Zambia built a dam where there wasn't a lake before, then built the largest man-made lake to 'feed' the dam and run the generators...
Droughts in Africa are a thing, and stock-piling countless acres of water in a drought-prone region seems like a bad idea.
The issue isn't the drought/lack of rain, it's that Zambia chose to build a dam when they should have gone solar or wind to generate electricity. Water is a constant struggle in Africa, basingbtheir economic future on never having a drought again seems like a bad idea...
Time matters (Score:5, Informative)
The dam was built in 1959. Neither solar nor large scale wind existed at the time.
Re: Time matters (Score:1)
Nuclear power did and would have provided low cost continuous stable energy.
Re: (Score:2)
Just barely, and certainly Zambia did not have the technical skills to run it.
"The Shippingport Atomic Power Station was (according to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission) the world's first full-scale atomic electric power plant devoted exclusively to peacetime uses.
The reactor reached criticality on December 2, 1957, and aside from stoppages for three core changes, it remained in operation until October 1982. The first electrical power was produced on December 18, 1957 as engineers synchronized the plant
Re: Time matters (Score:2)
I'm sorry, wasn't Africa known for droughts back then? The issue I point out is that depending on a water-based solution in a region that frequently suffers droughts was a bad idea.
There were other technologies available, they chose to make a lake in a desert and then spent 60 years doing nothing, hoping it wouldn't be a problem... So now it's problem.
Who could have imagined a major drought in Africa? Anyone that ever studied the continent, that's who.
(You know, they have coal in Africa, and back in the 195
yet they are being warned of a wet rainy season (Score:2)
The Centre for Trade Policy and Development (CTPD) has called on government to take timely and appropriate measures in anticipation of above-average normal rainfall in Zambia during the 2024/2025 rainy season.
There have been indications of normal to above-normal rainfall over most parts of Zambia during the 2024/2025 farming season.
CTPD Researcher-Climate Change and Environment, Solomon Mwampikita, says challenges such as flooding increased risks for waterborne diseases, and have often burdened poor communi
Zambia didn't build it either (Score:4, Informative)
It's worth keeping in mind that Zambia (as a country that exists now) didn't build this dam or hydroelectric station. It was build at the time of and by the government of the British colony of Rhodesia. None of the people in charge are anywhere near the current country.
Zambia in its current form exists for 60 years or so. It's government did not build any new generating capacity since that time. Make of it what you will.
Lake Kariba is shared between Zambia and Zimbwe (Score:1)
Another humor rich target (Score:2)
without Funny