Question Time - Populate or Perish

SUMMARY:
------------------------------
I recorded this Question Time moment because the link between population, energy and climate is urgent and too often ignored. In a lively exchange I push the panel — and mention my site KuroKeep.com — asking how declining oil production, sea‑level rise and the prospect of climate refugees from places like Indonesia, Vietnam and Bangladesh will alter the population scenarios we keep being given. I argue that personal carbon cuts won’t be enough while global population rises, and that nations like Australia should be urging international co‑operation on family planning and adaptation. The discussion also explores how energy limits will constrain GDP and productivity, and whether technology, solar manufacturing or smarter services can realistically fill the gap. This clip captures the tensions between official projections, infrastructure limits and real‑world risks — it’s frank, a little uncomfortable and essential viewing for anyone thinking about Australia’s future planning and policy choices.

RUMBLE DESCRIPTION:
-----------------------------------
Welcome — this is a raw clip from a Question Time session where I asked a direct, uncomfortable question: how do declining oil production, rising seas and future climate refugees change the population scenarios our governments keep using? I’ve put the charts and modelling on KuroKeep.com and I’ve spoken to the Resource Minister about a potential oil import crunch. In this video I press the panel to face the energy/population/climate nexus head‑on.

You’ll hear the last speaker finally connect the dots between energy supply, GDP and demographic pressures. We talk about likely displacement from low‑lying deltas in Indonesia, Vietnam and Bangladesh, coastal impacts here in Australia, and the cascade effects on GDP per capita when energy becomes scarcer and the workforce ages. Someone even quips about a “power plant in every basement” — a bit of dark humour that highlights how unrealistic some adaptation ideas can be without systemic planning.

I argue that individual behaviour change is important but insufficient: without stabilising population growth through family‑planning support and international co‑operation, reductions in per‑person emissions will be overwhelmed by sheer numbers. The panel also debates where productivity gains might realistically come from — solar manufacturing, smart services and automation are options, but none are magic bullets without energy security and sensible migration/adaptation policy.

If you care about Australia’s future — demography, energy policy, urban planning or climate adaptation — watch this clip, check the data at KuroKeep.com and share with people who influence policy. Leave your thoughts below: should Australia lead on population planning and international family‑planning efforts? Let’s get the conversation started.

⚠️ CONTENT DISCLAIMER ⚠️
The views, opinions, and statements expressed in this video are those of the individual speaker(s) and audience members. They do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or positions of Western Heritage Australia or its affiliates.

This content is presented for educational and informational purposes as well as to facilitate public discourse on important social and political issues. We provide a platform for diverse Australian voices to be heard, to assist the public in forming their own informed opinions.

Western Heritage Australia does not endorse, verify, or take responsibility for the accuracy of statements made by speakers. All claims, statistics, and opinions remain the responsibility of the original speaker. Viewers are encouraged to conduct their own research and consult multiple sources when forming opinions on these topics.

This video may contain strong political opinions, controversial viewpoints, strong language, or mature themes. Viewer discretion is advised.