The Population Problem

[Banzai]

There is a backwards mindset promoting the myth of high birth rates in all developing countries, or amongst all 'non-civilised' cultures (whatever that means).

They're actually only high in a very select few countries, and Africa as a whole: Iran and Lebanon are lower than Finland, Sweden, or Norway; Bangladesh, France, Ireland, and Mexico are all basically the same; the UK is the same as the US, with rates higher than both Russia or China etc. All these countries are below the replacement rate, with populations that are effectively declining.

Apparently we'll max out at 10 billion because of Africa's current population growth, but every other continent has already peaked. And once African birth rates drop to around 2 births/woman, the world's population will start to decline.

 

[ruffrecords]

The UK finally stopped generating electricity from coal this year, so we are making some progress, albeit painfully slowly.  I don't know whether it has been picked up in the US, but Europe has put a limit (2040) on the use of petrol and diesel cars and the switch to electric/hybrids is going on at a pace.  We will have to make enormous investments in electric recharging points and boosting power production to cope with this.

DaveP

I am not sure this is progress. We just moved most generation over to another fossil fuel, natural gas.
I don't think the ban on internal combustion engines is going to happen they way they want it either. It is fraught with fundamental problems.

Cheers

Ian

 

[Spiritworks]

Overpopulation is by far the root of all other problems on earth IMO. Thanks DaveP -- at least some people are talking. I think the cultural aspect of it is the worst, and probably the most disregarded.

This has been on my mind for decades, and certainly every day while sitting in traffic. Forgive me, but I've felt for a very long time that human beings are the cancer cells on the face of the earth.

 

[scott2000]

This has been on my mind for decades, and certainly every day while sitting in traffic. Forgive me, but I've felt for a very long time that human beings are the cancer cells on the face of the earth.

Mr. Smith????

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IM1-DQ2Wo_w

 

[DaveP]

This has been on my mind for decades, and certainly every day while sitting in traffic. Forgive me, but I've felt for a very long time that human beings are the cancer cells on the face of the earth.

While this seems harsh, there is an element of truth in it, due to the fact that we have arrived at the top of the food chain and we have few natural predators.

Our main cause of predation is disease and fighting amongst ourselves.

Genesis said to go forth and fill the Earth and I guess it was implicit that we would know when we had reached that point.  The earth showing signs of stress is an obvious marker.  Hell, even the Pope said recently that "there was no need to breed like rabbits", which has got to be a first for a Pope.

DaveP

 

[JohnRoberts]

I am not sure this is progress. We just moved most generation over to another fossil fuel, natural gas.
I don't think the ban on internal combustion engines is going to happen they way they want it either. It is fraught with fundamental problems.

Cheers

Ian

And EVs need to get their energy from something. In some theoretical future we can power everything from wind and solar , at least on sunny, windy days.  : (arguably all energy comes from solar.)

World population is a very old discussion and only a problem in some minds. A possible problem will be what happens when population stops growing? World economies are based on continually growing  (thus the conflicted sloppy immigration to keep the system growing).

The non-binding Paris accord is mostly a feel good exercise, and a money chase IMO. (BTW how do you quit a non-binding agreement? Nothing to quit.)

JR

PS: If you live in Calcutta don't assume the whole world is that crowded.  The world land mass average is something like 57 people per square km.  Australia is 3 people per square km. Macao China 20k per sq km.

 

[ruffrecords]

PS: If you live in Calcutta don't assume the whole world is that crowded.  The world land mass average is something like 57 people per square km.  Australia is 3 people per square km. Macao China 20k per sq km.

I am sure I read somewhere if you gave every person on earth on sqaure meter you could stand them all on the Isle of Wight.

Cheers

Ian

 

[DaveP]

I am sure I read somewhere if you gave every person on earth on square meter you could stand them all on the Isle of Wight.

You are probably correct, 10 x the current world population can be fitted into Loch Ness, but it is not the space they take up, it's the resources they use up that is causing the damage.

Fossil fuel burning, mineral extraction,  cement manufacture, fresh water abstraction, forest clearing in the Amazon for beef production, etc etc.

DaveP

 

[cyrano]

Forget about the cattle. Termites are much worse, when it comes to methane production. Would you like to eradicate all of them?  :-\

Besides, there's a very simple solution that was recently discovered and that reduces methane production in cattle with about 95%. It's a natural feed additive that's not expensive and cattle seem to like it. Sorry, forgot what plant it was exactly.

That amount of methane is still only a small part of what a melting and rotting permafrost will produce. First estimates show around 1.000 to 15.000 times the amount of methane that is produced worldwide, cattle, termites and industry combined.

 

[micaddict]

That amount of methane is still only a small part of what a melting and rotting permafrost will produce.

Right.

And why is the permafrost melting?

Not to mention the amount the sea can  release if/when temperatures rise enough.

Snowball anyone?

If it happens it will happen anyway?

 

[Spiritworks]

Mr. Smith????

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IM1-DQ2Wo_w

Believe it or not, I never saw this movie.  Unfortunately, Mr. Smith seems correct in a lot of ways.

 

[Phrazemaster]

Right.

And why is the permafrost melting?

Not to mention the amount the sea can  release if/when temperatures rise enough.

Snowball anyone?

If it happens it will happen anyway?

But how to explain that the other planets are also warming too?

I'm not discounting that humans are affecting the planet, and common sense says we must be contributing to the warming. But I'm also not sure this wouldn't be happening anyway - or maybe it might be delayed a bit if humans weren't here but - I think it would be happening anyway.

Also, there's a lot of data to support the idea that earth has experienced periods of warming as much as, or greater, than we are currently experiencing - despite the populist science of "An Inconvenient Truth." There are two sides to this debate, and despite the alarmist "the science is settled you idiots" viewpoint, a lot of excellent scientists don't see this warming the same way.

In the '70's we were worried about global cooling.

But what I think we can, or should, all agree to is this: let's move towards green energies that don't pollute or cause greenhouse gases. It will make for a better planet, better health, beauty, and also do our human part to alleviate any warming we may be causing.

<"Flame Suite: On!">

Oh, did I say that out loud? Sorry! That was supposed to be for Siri.

 

[Andy Peters]

One ever-increasing phenomenon during my lifetime has been seeing people I consider to be most intelligent/civilized having  less and less kids. And vice-versa.

That is the premise of the future history documentary film, “Idiocracy.”

 

[JohnRoberts]

That is the premise of the future history documentary film, “Idiocracy.”

I love idiocracy as a satirical political statement warning about the importance of education.  In the movie some of the idiots had large families but IIRC the lawyer was single and lived alone (not likely in a dystopian future with too many people).  Prostitution was apparently commercialized and merchandized by H&R Block, Starbucks, and google.

That movie hypothesizes about a time after many decades of lowest common denominator running the show... I guess they made that movie before the global warming meme or they would have shown DC underwater too.  : It was written primarily as a comedy not serious political satire, but it works for me.

Like good science fiction, some of the screen writers predictions have already come true (big ass fries).  I think the movie should be watched by all.  It is funny too. IMO

JR

 

[mattiasNYC]

It was most definitely political satire.

- In  the film  President Camacho is a 5 time 'smackdown' champion. Clearly unqualified for the job

- In reality, Trump is a former game-/"reality"-show host with multiple bankruptcies. Clearly unqualified.

I could see how the irony of Idiocracy preceding this is lost on some though. I'm betting it'll only get worse.

 

[DaveP]

Something Positive.
http://www.bbc.com/news/av/magazine-41391844/why-is-africa-building-a-great-green-wall

DaveP

 

[dmp]

I think that this has been talked about and it is regularly battled about in the USA.
International family planning.  Providing people the education and ability to control their own fertility, voluntarily.
Of course, it gets embattled with religious beliefs. Some politicians believe the discussion should be limited to abstinence education. People start yelling about abortion.

I personally do not think it would be a good idea to restrict anyone's freedom to chose to have children, but make economic and education incentives go the right way.

 

[DaveP]

+1
DaveP

 

[dmp]

+1
DaveP

Then you might be interested to look into the actions taken by the US under different administrations.
Obama restored funding to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and increased funding for international family planning significantly.  GW Bush had withheld  funding along with implementing a gag rule on mentioning abortions.
Trump issued an executive action in January cutting funding to any international family planning group that included counseling of abortions.  Furthermore, Trump's proposed budget would cut $2.2 billion from global health spending.
>>>
"The program that would be hit hardest would be family planning. The U.S. currently spends $607.5 million per year to provide women in poor countries with birth control and reproductive healthcare. Trump appears to want to zero that out entirely. His budget proposal explicitly calls for eliminating the largest source of this funding: $524 million disbursed by USAID, stating that the cut "achieves further savings" to the budget."
>>>
 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
“For too long, international family planning assistance has been used as a political wedge issue, the subject of a back and forth debate that has served only to divide us,” said Barack Obama upon overturning the policy as one of his first acts in office. “It is time that we end the politicization of this issue.”