Talk:Natural resource/Archive 1

Archive 1

Aren't ALL resources renewable?

Trees, Coal, Oil, etc. Ten years, thousand years, million years... it's all Jacob Green -sonali singh

The appropriate page ha ha ha jokefor jacobgrenwould be renewable resource, but no, many are not (e.g. biodiversity to name one) and something that takes millions of years is hardly something that can be called renewable in any meaningful way. But yes, there is a continuum based on rate of regeneration. Richard001 00:36, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I think about natural resources all the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.109.46.26 (talk) 16:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC) [[1]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.145.236.209 (talk) 22:51, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah.. someone, hopefully someone who knows what they're doing, needs to fix this article. AlexWangombe (talk) 11:59, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I hope they don't. I use this poorly constructed entry as a discussion topic in my Conservation Class. There have been efforts to improve it but someone (the original author) is so convinced that their view is correct that he/she always changes it back. All the better for my needs but not the advancement of knowledge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. Ludlow (talk • contribs) 14:46, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

If you use this article in your course syllabus, that may help explain why it's subject to such an unusually high degree of anonymous vandalism (for an article that would otherwise seem to be pretty low-profile). Tim Pierce (talk) 14:55, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Possible but I doubt that is the case. The vandalism was occurring long before I linked it to my class. I no longer link the page but use a static snapshot (with attribution) for the discussion topic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. Ludlow (talk • contribs) 19:53, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

No

Renewable means that it can be replenished faster than it is used. Energy sources like gas and petrol take millions of years to replenish, whereas energy from sources like wind are constantly being replenished —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sworded lion26 (talk • contribs) 10:59, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

I thought id just raise awareness (unless everybody is already aware) of the fact that this page has been vandalised. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BhainsRajput (talk • contribs) 14:07, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Edit

I have managed to retrieve all lost information during the vandal attack and have restored the article to its previous glory. --BhainsRajput (talk) 14:40, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

i agree

the word renewable means something that can be made again.so when you say non renewable it means something that cannot be newed. fossil fuels cannot be renewed. it just takes a long time. they should be classified into the renewable resources —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.245.132.88 (talk) 01:07, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree, people who honestly need reliable answers cannot find the correct ones anymore. people who do not know what they are talking about need to stop acting like they do and need to leave it to the people who do!!!!!!!--75.163.91.208 (talk) 17:16, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

This Talk page needs cleaning up!

It has too much random stuff on it. And there's no doubt there's vandalism. A few things to get straight: Renewable = Limited but can be replenished [relatively quickly]. A good example is solar energy, which we will receive until the sun dies out or something like that. Nonrenewable = Limited but takes ridiculously long to replenish or cannot be replenished feasibly. An example of this (is/are?) fossil fuels; they are dead plants and animals from millions or billions of years ago that sank into the ground and decomposed and eventually became their current state (prior to human use, that is).

Whatever happened to maturity on the Internet, anyway? There ARE small pockets of it, shouldn't this be one? Maxaxle (talk) 02:53, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Dichotomous Hobgoblins

Do not think that all natural resources can be easily renewed. That is only Renewable resources, like solar. Resources like oil is running out which makes it a non-renewable energy, and we need to not take it for granted. Do not get hung up on the renewable vs non-renewable distinction. These are artificial categories we created. People often put too much emphasis on this distinction. They are somehow comforted by the process of categorizing. Just because we can classify them as one or the other does not necessarily help us understand the challenges of sustainable management.

In an article from 1992 (Bio Science 42 (November): 761-771), Daily and Ehrlich attempted to shine a light on the overly simplistic renewable – non-renewable dichotomy. They suggested we view natural resources, including nature’s services, as a 3-dimensional matrix. They made three sets of dichotomies. One important dichotomy listed by Daily and Ehrich (more important than the traditional classifications) is: Substitutable vs. Essential. Water, for exam is critical and non-substitutable resource. If our needs can be satisfied via substitution, our management choices are more flexible (energy for example). It is often our cultural values, rather than our technology, which prevents us for being more willing to find substitutions.

I am pleased at the progress being made on this page in the last few weeks. In the past it has been constrained by antiquated understanding of human needs, wants, and values of Nature and the relationship to economics. Thanks to those who have made the improvements. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. Ludlow (talk • contribs) 16:14, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

---

thank you

---

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.225.91.200 (talk) 22:04, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Agriculture

As of September 2010, Agriculture is listed as an example of a natural resource and yet later in the article it says that agriculture is not a natural resource but rather "Agriculture is considered a man-made resource.". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.55.27.153 (talk) 15:48, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Outer Space?

RE: vandalism revert

The article clearly implies that only Earth based resources are under consideration yet I was tagged for editing this in.

Are natural resources in outer space considered natural resources or not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.65.0.169 (talk) 07:47, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

The term, natural resources, is not limited only to those located on Earth. Those on Earth are Earth’s natural resources. Those on the Moon are the Moon’s natural resources. Those on Mars are Mars’ natural resources. And so on, and so on, etc.

Webster's definition of natural resources is as follows: “capacities (as native wit) or materials (as mineral deposits and waterpower) supplied by nature.” There is no mention of these being restricted to terrestrial (i.e., Earth) resources. Sorry if I thought it was vandalism. I really racked my brain over that one. — SpikeToronto 07:58, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Haha, no foul, so many nuts try to edit this stuff. Anyways will put something like "currently natural resources are extracted from the Earth, yet the possibility remains they could be extracted outside the planet such as asteroid mining (the most respectable of the schemes) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.65.0.169 (talk) 08:08, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

You’ll need to provide a verifiable reference/citation for the statement. Find an article in which someone with NASA, or some academic, is either quoted as saying something like that or writes about it. The statement needs a verifiable reference/citation to satisfy Wikipedia's prime directive WP:V. — SpikeToronto 08:15, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Reasons for changes from GSE 843 Group

Depletion Editing reasons

1. First edit: Reasons for edit to depletion: So far we have edited the first sentence. We have kept with the general topic of the first sentence, however we provided evidence of why the depletion of natural resources is a concern for governments and organisations through the use of Agenda 21. We added this as we felt that evidence needed to be provided to this statement to make the statement valid.

   We started a new sentence in discussing sustainable development as we felt the term 'Sustainable Development' needs to be discussed further. This is the reason for using the Brundtland Commission's definition and the further elaboration on the term through referencing Agenda 21.

   We thought the reason why natural resource use was considered to be a sustainable development issue needed to be explained, as such we added this explanation and validated it through the use of two journal articles, one a peer reviewed article the other a literature review. Again, the reason for these edits was to enhance validity as well as allow for better flow of semantics through the text. Vlr soo (talk) 10:10, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

2. Second edit: Reason for edit of move of sentence in regards to social unrest and conflict and extended elaboration on the issue of social inequity: We felt that while the comment on social unrest and conflict due to natural resource depletion was significant, we felt it needed further introduction as to why social conflict and unrest occurs. This is the reason for the added two sentences prior to the mention of social conflict and unrest. We have also added a reference to the sentence about social unrest and conflict as it validates the statement.Vlr soo (talk) 00:33, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
3. Third edit: We felt a reason needed to be given as to why there is a particular concern for rainforest regions. This is the reason for the mention of it being the Year of the Forest prior to this sentence. We also removed the sentence 'irreplaceable genetic natural capital[energy conservation] of natural resources is the major focus of natural capitalism, environmentalism, the ecology movement, and green politics' as the sentence structure did not allow for the reader to gain meaning. We added the two sentences about the statistics of degradation of rainforests as we felt it provided further evidence of why there is a concern regarding the depletion of rainforests. Vlr soo (talk) 00:59, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
4. Fourth Edit:We changed the first sentence as we felt there was no evidence provided to suggest that mining etc were considered natural resource industries, we also deleted hunting as we think this is no longer a common method to access natural resource. We used the quotes from Nelson to add validity and reliability. We deleted the sentence 'Agriculture is considered a man-made resource' as there was not a reference attached to this statement that justifies that it is so. Instead we stated that agriculture is a driver for depletion of natural resources and justified these statements with reliable examples.

   We added the sentence prior to Theodore Roosevelt's quote as although we thought the quote was appropriate, it needed an introduction to the quote as to why the quote is significant to depletion. Vlr soo (talk) 01:56, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

5. Fifth Edit: We removed the quote box from protection to depletion as we felt this was the more appropriate placement due to 'Depletion' being the section where the quote is referred to. We also deleted the last sentence, as although it was referenced, it was a definition of natural resources and as such it was not appropriate to put it in the 'depletion' section. It was also placed at the end of the last paragraph, this placement of this quote did not add meaning to the previous sentences in the paragraph.Vlr soo (talk) 02:05, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Management Editing reasons

1. First edit: Removing the second sentence of 'Natural resources management is interrelated with the concept of sustainable development, a principle that forms a basis for land management and environmental governance throughout the world' as we think that the definition is inaccurate. The more suitable definition has been defined in the 'depletion' column.Vlr soo (talk) 02:03, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
2. Second edit: We also removed the second paragraph about 'In contrast to the policy emphases of urban planning and the broader concept of environmental management, Natural resource management specifically focuses on a scientific and technical understanding of resources and ecology and the life- supporting capacity of those resources' and replaced it with the description of natural resource management that is agreeable with the international organisations' literature i.e the UNEP, UNDP, World Resources Institute and World Bank. We changed this paragraph as the term 'urban planning' had not been mentioned previously and the structure of the sentence does not allow for meaning making from the reader.
3. Third edit: We inserted the reference by Ostrom E cited in Kommers and Mackie, 2005;and another publication of UNEP,UNDP,World Bank and World Resources 2005 to support the added information. Links to references are provided for both literature.

Image editing reasons:

1. First edit: We removed the second picture of the glacier because the function of glacier as drinking water for living things is not common in a global manner. Thus, we replaced it with the picture of a waterfall in Mount Kinabalu in which we find waterfalls provide more value other than drinking water as a natural resource. We think the description in the caption for the images is too precise on how Fatu-hiva forest and ocean waves can be used as resources. Therefore, we elaborated on some areas where these resources can be applied in reality. We also changed the structure of the first sentence for the image caption of wind turbines so that it is more meaningful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vlr soo (talk • contribs) 01:47, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Protection Edit:

We have added the first paragraph as we felt there needed to be an introduction to 'protection', although the two paragraphs on the types of protection is necessary, the lack of introduction does not allow the reader to gain an understanding of what is meant by protection of natural resources and the importance of protecting natural resouces. We decided to introduce 'protection' with two important papers as it shows the importance of protection.Vlr soo (talk) 02:19, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Text Order Edit:

We have placed 'Depletion' and 'protection' before management as we felt this was a more logical order. As, we feel that for one to realise something needs to be protected or managed means there is an issue that needs to be addressed. In relation to natural resources the issue is depletion.Vlr soo (talk) 02:29, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Introduction edit:

We have created an introductory section into the layout, to give a better overview of the topic, we also put some of the classification methods in this section, mainly because they are more descriptive than true commonly used classifications. These included the geographical distribution of resources (ubiquitous and localized) and limits of resource availability (exhaustible and inexhaustible)

Classification edit:

We made a few edits to the description of Abiotic and Biotic classifications, as the previous descriptions could have been more clearer. the classifications in the next section weren't edited, as descriptions of those methods pf classification were difficult to come by, and seemed to be similar to what was already present. The most significant changes to this section were made in the renewable/non-renewable section, as we felt the previous descriptions were inadequate. it is true that fossil fuels are classified as non-renewable, though since they do form naturally it was felt an explanation of why something is classified as either renewable or non-renewable to help increase understanding. Also some mention was made of special cases of the non-renewable radioactive resources as they are in a natural state of decline. We also deleted the examples section, as all these examples were mentioned in the classification sections under different headings, which made this section redundant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.196.35.170 (talk) 03:49, 25 September 2011 (UTC) Vlr soo (talk) 07:21, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Economic definition

In economics, the term natural resource has the specific definition that it is non-excludable (impossible to prevent people from using it) and rivalrous (one individual's use reduces availability to others). In this article, the term natural resource is defined very vaguely. Someone? 194.144.97.48 (talk) 17:22, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

GLOBAL WARMING!!!!!

global warming is becoming a major issue nowadays, this is effecting the ozone layer which is depleting and causing holes in the atmosphere. we are the major contributers to this we can prevent this by just stop using so many cars, we should stop wasting electricity, etc.

WAKE UP GUYZZZ LETS WORK FOR A BETTER FUTURE FOR THE NEW GENERATION!!

JUST TRY PLANTING 1 TREE OR SOME OTHER STUFF AND SEE WHAT EFFECT IT MAKES. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.176.103.152 (talk) 06:54, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

yewe yewe wikipedia we! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.138.85.44 (talk) 15:11, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

natural resources

natural resources are very important.—sunlight — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.177.79.106 (talk) 04:30, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

== jacob green

  jacob green founded natural resources   on a common day .  if you be mean  to him you will die  okᾨ  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.45.227.174 (talk) 20:49, 12 November 2013 (UTC) 

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Natural resource. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.maweb.org/documents/document.272.aspx.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110725052556/http://www.sc.com.my/eng/html/cg/cg2011/pdf/chapter3.pdf to http://www.sc.com.my/eng/html/cg/cg2011/pdf/chapter3.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:26, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Natural resource. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080720095945/http://www.science.org.au/nova/newscientist/027ns_005.htm?id=mg19426051.200&print=true to http://www.science.org.au/nova/newscientist/027ns_005.htm?id=mg19426051.200&print=true

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:51, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Preserve the natural resources

Preserve the natural resources 2401:4900:6053:8050:0:0:33:20E6 (talk) 05:12, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

natural resources

Open main menu

Wikipedia

Search Natural resource Article Talk Language Watch Edit "Primary resource" redirects here. For original sources used in research, see Primary source. Natural resources are resources that are drawn from nature and used with few modifications. This includes the sources of valued characteristics such as commercial and industrial use, aesthetic value, scientific interest and cultural value. On Earth, it includes sunlight, atmosphere, water, land, all minerals along with all vegetation, and wildlife.[1][2][3][4]

The rainforest in Fatu-Hiva, in the Marquesas Islands, is an example of an undisturbed natural resource. Forest provides timber for humans, food, water and shelter for the flora and fauna tribes and animals. The nutrient cycle between organisms form food chains and foster a biodiversity of species.

The Carson Fall in Mount Kinabalu, Malaysia is an example of undisturbed natural resources. Waterfalls provide spring water for humans, animals and plants for survival and also habitat for marine organisms. The water current can be used to turn turbines for hydroelectric generation.

The ocean is an example of a natural resource. Ocean waves can be used to generate wave power, a renewable energy source. Ocean water is important for salt production, desalination, and providing habitat for deep-water fishes. There is biodiversity of marine species in the sea where nutrient cycles are common.

A picture of the Udachnaya pipe, an open-pit diamond mine in Siberia. An example of a non-renewable natural resource. Natural resources can be part of humanity's natural heritage or protected in nature reserves. Particular areas (such as the rainforest in Fatu-Hiva) often feature biodiversity and geodiversity in their ecosystems. Natural resources may be classified in different ways. Natural resources are materials and components (something that can be used) that can be found within the environment. Every man-made product is composed of natural resources (at its fundamental level).

A natural resource may exist as a separate entity such as fresh water, air, as well as any living organism such as a fish, or it may be transformed by extractivist industries into an economically useful form that must be processed to obtain the resource such as metal ores, rare-earth elements, petroleum, timber and most forms of energy. Some resources are renewable resource, which means that they can be used at a certain rate and natural processes will restore them, whereas many extractive industries rely heavily on non-renewable resources that can only be extracted once.

Natural-resource allocations can be at the center of many economic and political confrontations both within and between countries. This is particularly true during periods of increasing scarcity and shortages (depletion and overconsumption of resources). Resource extraction is also a major source of human rights violations and environmental damage. The Sustainable Development Goals and other international development agendas frequently focus on creating more sustainable resource extraction, with some scholars and researchers focused on creating economic models, such as circular economy, that rely less on resource extraction, and more on reuse, recycling and renewable resources that can be sustainably managed. 2001:569:52E4:6B00:71B6:6B59:C2A4:B54C (talk) 03:16, 29 November 2022 (UTC)