Or (at least in the US), we will simply stop doing things like growing alfalfa in the desert to feed cows being raised in Texas. Sure beef will be a little more expensive but…

You’re actually right. We’ll probably burn garbage and radio hosts will call people against burning garbage effeminate names.

Burning garbage may be one of the best things you can do with garbage - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/21/climate/sweden-garbage-us...

As you can set it up to burn very hot and have all sorts of scrubbers on the outcomes.

Burning anything is never the right answer in a world of climate change.

We are scrambling to find ways to capture atmospheric carbon and store it underground and burning garbage is literally the opposite of that.

If handling waste and burying it costs X carbon, and burning it creates Y carbon, and Y is less than X, then burning is better than burying.

You'd have to do the math, it's not manifestly obvious that it's not the case (especially once you consider all the transportation involved in sending waste around the country and across the ocean).

On first principles, there's no reason that the cost of transporting trash to the incinerator is any less carbon intensive than transporting trash to a landfill.

Maybe people prefer incinerators in their community over landfills in their community (unclear), but if that's the case, that's a policy decision and not one that seeks to minimize carbon emissions.

Lots of recycling (has) been transported across the ocean to China.

It's likely that landfill are the way to go in many cases, but people don't like them.

Desalination cones should work in tropical climates.

[1] http://www.watercone.com/product.html

This is brilliant.

The same designer made this Terracooler which is also a fascinating idea.

http://www.terracooler.org/

Does this exist? The product page mentions that the planned price is "below € 20", but the news page doesn't have anything newer than 2007

That's a damn good argument for making sure we don't go into overpopulation.