They call it a water problem but it's really a mass overpopulation problem.
A tiny fraction of the world's water evaporates from oceans and falls as freshwater precipitation. Unless we expend enormous energy into artificial desalination plants, natural evaporation is the only desalinating process we have to get fresh water.
As human population grows, the fresh water per person falls in proportion. Iran has rapidly growing population from crazy unsustainable birthrates as part of the national policy of extreme oppression of women. California has and unsustainable mass immigration overwhelm its environment even as the native population wisely reduced birthrates to a sustainable level.
Most of the water is captured in reservoirs and diverted to agriculture. Growing food for people takes far more water than lawns and toilets and factories. Growing meat takes even more than other food, and people sure seem to like meat.
When water is used for agriculture, it mostly evaporates back into the air and falls back mostly into oceans mixing with salt water, so the fresh water is lost.
Older populations lived in wetter places where some water would trickle back into the water table instead of evaporating. Mass overpopulation has led to growing populations in places like Iran and south California where all the water evaporates due to extreme dry that would be uninhabitable without reservoir diversions.
The natural stream and lake life on Earth is dying out from diversions of rivers into reservoirs. That's what the op is about. It's all based in mass overpopulation. If we can't find a way back from our disastrously high numbers on this planet, we're going to see a lot more misery and tragedy.
I don't know why it is so desperately needed, but Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon seems to have lost about 3% population during this period, going from 6300 in 1999 to 6069 in 2012.
Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon, New Caledonia, French Polynesia and Wallis-et-Futuna are rarely included in such stats as they are not part of the EU and not geographically part of Europe either, unlike French Guiana and the others which are part of EU, so at least part of Europe in a political sense.
(Symbiote, all of these territories are very much part of France though, just under different rules for some of them.)
I don't know where you're going with Clipperton though, it's sometimes illegally visited and trashed by fishers and such, but they can't be considered a population in any sense.
Nine million on Ireland in 1845?! They tell us the famine was caused by monoculture; they tell us it was a fungus; they tell us it was English land and farm policy; they tell us it was inequality; they tell us it was import quotas.
But they never mention that Ireland was horribly overcrowded. Nine million is jam packed horror.
At six million today, Ireland should be closed to immigration and paying naturalized Eastern Europeans and North Africans to give up citizenship and leave. Even six million is dangerously overpopulated. Thirty million is pure nightmare.
As a long-term resident of one of the most diverse boroughs in London, I can vouch for my own lack of desperation to deport immigrants, though I'm sure you can find the same xenophobic vocal minority that can find in most countries if you look hard enough. Though I do conceed that I am finding the task of replacing myself with a baby somewhat difficult, which may or may not be due to lack of large, sparsely populated land mass.
WildUtah, I have no idea where you are getting your information, but I am Irish, I have lived in Ireland my whole life. I'm in Ireland, looking out at Ireland as I write this message.
Your assessment is extraordinarily inaccurate.
Then why is the majority clamouring for more homes to be built? Property prices are climbing, not because things are too crowded, but because there aren't enough houses.. Surely if it were "insanely crowded" here there'd be more of a popular pushback saying "where are we going to put these new houses?". Let me tell you: it doesn't exist.
The Irish government is going to great lengths to encourage new house building to meet the demand.
Ireland is famous for for manufacturing land out of the sea? Really? Well you're going to have inform this Irishman what you are referring to. The only things I can think of is the creation of Bull Island -- which was an unintended side-effect of the building of the Bull Wall, a successful project to dredge Dublin Bay undertaken in the early 18th Century  -- and various land reclamation projects around Dublin Port over the past 300 years, which a quick google search will inform you were more to do with planning permission than overcrowding.
For a country which is "insanely crowded", someone forgot to tell the population that. Add to this the population density facts which other commenters have provided, which you disregard and I can tell you that your information sources are lying to you.
I just spent a fantastic vacation in Ireland, traveling between Dublin, Cork, and Galway by car--which meant a lot of narrow but very well-kept roads between many tiny towns. The idea that double, even triple, the population of Ireland would somehow not have "forests and open space to adjourn to" is...well...it's interesting.
Wait, did I say interesting? I meant "horse manure". That is an empty country, with plenty of room and remarkably little need for the sort of xenophobia you've espoused in this thread (a xenophobia that no one I met in Ireland seemed into, either!). And I don't think HN needs it, either.
Oh, it's so nice you've seen the country from a car. A manufactured experience professionally landscaped by traffic engineers observed from within a machine those engineers are employed to promote taught you all you need to know about a country.
Ireland is almost empty of wilderness and has scant backcountry. Even the mountain ranges have a very few trails backed by industrial tree farms. Most of the supposed forest left is so tightly controlled that the wave pattern of regularity produces moire patterns in the trees. All the life, nature and interest is squeezed out.
There's certainly no place left to seek extended solitude or homestead cheap land. The youth of the countryside are leaving or escaping to cities. I'm glad the nearly-indoor controlled experience of the roads was nice for you, but Ireland is full and bursting at the seams. More people will only make it worse.
Only one thing in this entire post is not wildly inaccurate: there is a lot of rural to urban migration amongst young people in Ireland, but this is something which happens in every country in the world.
If it is any stronger in Ireland, it has much more to do with how bad the infrastructure is in Ireland and how Dublin-centric most investment is.
"A manufactured experience professionally landscaped by traffic engineers"? You give our government more credit than it deserves.
Squatting is a common posture when hanging out in certain cultures (notably, but not limited to, slavic countries), and it also turns out that there is a large overlap between these cultures and the cultures in which wearing track pants and flat caps is common everyday attire.
Apple's storage pricing model would be unsustainable in a competitive environment. Entry level products with 16GB exist solely to establish a 'free' subsidized level while practical use requires a US$750 64GB model.
Ordinarily Samsung and Moto would make a phone of similar quality and charge the market rate of $8 for the 64GB upgrade to undercut Apple.
Unfortunately it's not a competitive market. Apple's 2013 iPhone 5S still has lower power use and more processing power the current Samsung phones because Apple invested in chip design and shipped an AArch64 chip Samsung can't match even with two years (1.33 Moore's Law cycles) of process upgrades and access to Apple's tapeouts.
Apple's screen process is still brighter with more faithful colors. Apple's case design is still more fashionable (even though I don't like the latest ones, they look slick). Apple's net software and services like maps and backup are catching up to Google and ahead of M'soft or anyone else. Apple still has better control over power consumption and background processing in its OS. Apple's user experience is still clearly better and easier than Samsung or Google.
A lot of that is Google losing interest in Motorola, the Nexus brand, and Android. The Nexus 5 was the last inexpensive high quality pure Android effort and it wasn't profitable. Motorola wasn't worth keeping. Android is good enough to keep Apple and Microsoft from squeezing Google off the net and that's all Google needs. Google hasn't even updated Android to take advantage of AArch64 which cripples all the Android phone makers against Apple.
Ultimately, Google knows that they can't compete against Apple because carriers have contempt for quality. No other maker but Apple has loyal and lucrative customers that will switch carriers to keep using Apple devices. Thus no other manufacturer has leverage to get the best quality devices it can make to users. Carriers want your phone crippled because they dream of controlling you and governments hand them monopolies so they can control your device maker.
The result is that only Apple can make a top flight device. And therefore they can use monopoly price discrimination tactics to bleed extra money from you for 64GB.
It beats the alternative which is carriers ruining all devices including Apple. I like Apple robbing me a lot more than AT&T or Telcel or Softbank or NT&T or China Mobile or Verizon.
I bicycle 150 miles a week mostly on steep mountain roads. I seldom faint, but hopping out of bed to go take care of chores in the morning usually results in brief loss of balance and eyesight as my head loses blood pressure for a few seconds.
Sometimes I have to sit down in the bedroom door frame so that I don't faint and collapse. Once I'm up though, my body is full of vigor.
You can extract argon from air to do most of what helium is used for. It's completely inert and liquefies at 87K. Pure argon gas costs $5 a kilo. Liquid nitrogen and carbon dioxide will cover most of the rest of the applications and are much cheaper.
Neon from air is much more expensive at $300 a kilo. That's because Neon is at a low concentration similar to helium. Helium can be extracted for about the same price as neon, so we're not in danger of ever running out. Helium is a renewable resource that leaks out of the Earth's crust and regenerates from solar wind constantly, contrary to op.
It's only extremely cheap helium that will run out, and most of the supplies in the world are still underground in natural gas reserves. There are generations of cheap helium left.
No, it's not just that you "can" extract argon from the air, it's that we do, a lot. It's widely industrially available. If Argon were a suitable replacement for Helium it would be used instead due to its vastly lower cost, wider availability, and easier handling.
From this we can conclude that Argon is not a suitable replacement for the current uses of Helium. People pay a premium to use Helium today, and that speaks to the fact that Helium has unique properties that are highly advantageous.
He costs $3 per m^3 on the open market. Argon costs about $8 per m^3. N2 is cheaper.
There are some uses for He that are harder to replace. Argon will collect in low spaces more than He; N2 might be a compromise for welding. Nothing can be relied on to be quite as cold as liquid He. But there is a lot of substitution that can be done when He prices rise, several generations from now.
Dude. 87K =/ 4K. 87K>77K. That means its worse than nitrogen, which is dirt cheap and fairly useless for serious cooling. Even run-of-the-mill superconductor magnet cooling is a stretch for nitrogen, let alone exploration and exploitation of more exotic quantum effects.
Peak conventional oil was reached in 2005. World production of liquid oil is already steadily falling and will never again reach its peak. Synthetic and deep water and rock and tar to oil conversion processes have kept total world production steady since then and refinery efficiencies have been stepped up to produce more motor fuel, but increasingly expensive and heroic extraction is necessary to keep all that up. Prices have been rising and will continue to rise. The lower prices this year are unsustainable as they are now below marginal cost of production.
And peak helium is linked tightly to peak natural gas, because that's how helium is obtained. It's a byproduct of natural gas. When natural gas production falls in the next few decades, He will do the same.
Of course, we can always extract He from the atmosphere. Unlike oil, it renews itself -- contrary to op's implication -- from underground radiation and solar wind. it won't ever get much more expensive than neon.