Pretty simple really.
Too many people.
The cause of all our problems including the subject of the forum article.
But we are evolving ourselves out of existence.
Sadly though we are going to take all the other animal species with us.

What does ateday suggest doing about "too many people"?

This is an excellent article is dead right. Thank you Julian Cribb. Toxic chemical emissions is where the UN should be devoting its effort, not CO2 emissions.

A point not made in the article is that many, perhaps most, of the chemicals do not decay. Unlike nuclear waste hey have no half life. And, unlike nuclear waste they are not contained and kept separate from the environment. They will be toxic for ever, and released to the environment. And we keep adding to the pile.

Toxic pollution from coal fired electricity generation is responsible for some 25,000 avoidable fatalities per year in the USA and many more work-days-lost and massive costs to the health system. Coal fired electricity generation is responsible for about 15 fatalities per TWh of electricity in the USA and the world average is 60 fatalities per TWh. Nuclear causes just 0.09 fatalities per TWh. So replacing coal with nuclear would save over 1 million fatalities per year (double that by 2050).

Furthermore, if nuclear was allowed to be cheap, as it could and should be, electricity could be rolled out more quickly to the billions of people who don't yet have it. That would avoid millions more fatalities per year by replacing, dung, wood and coal used in cooking and heating.

The people who oppose nuclear power are basically evil. Their morals are repugnant.

[some argue renewables can do the same job as nuclear. That is a statement from ignorance. Renewables are an enormous waste of money with no realistic prospects of contributing much except for small niche applications.

Your worrying about situations that are irrelevant nobody has a guaranteed lifespan .
The chemicals your on about help us get to wherever we do .

While I have the greatest respect for Julian in his time as science correspondent with the Australian, as a commentator he seems to have descended into madness..

This point: "Agent Orange phase of the Vietnam war (and which is now documented as having killed or maimed 400,000 people and deformed half a million babies)". Both figures are straight fantasy. I think you'll find that the 400,000 figure is more than the death toll of the entire war when both sides were making serious efforts to kill one another, and civilians.Agent Orange has been accused of all sorts of things but not of being directly poisonous to humans. Julian really needs to give his sources on that one.

As for this business about industrial chemicals being found here and there.. most of it is, I suspect, trace elements far below any any concentrations that might cause harm. People living in industrial societies that use these chemicals are living longer, not shorter lives, and are active for a greater proportion of their lives. Julian should make some effort to explain away that fact.

But Julian, this is wonderful news! It means I don't have to worry about global warming, Asian Flu, hunger, farm clearances OR nanotechnology takeover any more, because we're soon all going to die from toxic chemicals!

You've no idea how much better that makes me feel!