Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on June 21, 2014
Are 7 Billion People Too Many?
The Earth, in case you haven’t noticed, is a big mess right now. All living things, humans included, are suffering the effects of a planet stressed to the breaking point.
(At the time of Jesus, there were about 200 million people on Earth.)
Consider the problems we face:
GLOBAL WARMING. Carbon dioxide and other global-warming pollutants are collecting in the atmosphere, trapping the sun’s heat and causing the planet to warm up. Already we are experiencing record heat (the 10 hottest years on record have all occurred since 1990), drought, storms and fires, and they are expected to get worse. According to the United States Global Change Research Program (which includes the Department of Defense, NASA, National Science Foundation, and other government agencies): “global warming is unequivocal and primarily human-induced” and that “climate changes are underway in the United States and are projected to grow.”
(In 1000 A.D. the population of the world was about 300 million.)
SPECIES LOSS. The planet is losing species faster than at any time since 65 million years ago, when the earth was believed to have been hit by an enormous asteroid. The National Wildlife Federation estimates we are losing 27,000 species a year. Dr. Richard Leakey, the famed paleontologist, believes that half of the earth’s species will vanish within one hundred years, a mass extinction that “threatens the entire complex fabric of life on Earth, including the species responsible for it: Homo sapiens.”
(By 1500, the world population was roughly 500 million.)
POVERTY. According to a World Bank study, more than half the people in the world live on less than $2.50 a day. More than half of the world’s nations cannot grow or import enough food to adequately feed their population. One-third of all deaths around the world, according to UNICEF, including 22,000 children a day, are a result of poverty.
(By 1800, the world population reached nearly one billion.)
POLLUTION. About 40 percent of deaths worldwide are caused by water, air and soil pollution, according to a 2007 Cornell research study. With 1.2 billion people lacking clean water, the World Health Organization estimates 3.4 million people a year, mostly children, die from water-related disease. According to the WHO, another seven million people every year die from air pollution.
(By 1850, the population of the world grew to about 1,200,000,000.)
WATER SHORTAGES. More than 1 billion people are currently living without clean drinking water. The World Bank reports that 80 countries now have water shortages that threaten health and economies. By 2030, nearly half of the world’s people will be living in areas of acute water shortage, according to a U.N. report.
(By 1900, the world’s population rose to about 1,600,000,000.)
LOSS OF RAIN FORESTS. We are swiftly losing the one of the Earth’s most important ecosystems. Experts estimate that the last remaining rain forests could be consumed in less than 40 years. Harvard biologist E.O. Wilson called the depletion of rain-forest areas “the greatest extinction since the end of the age of dinosaurs.”
(By 1950, there were over 2,500,000,000 people in the world.)
These are just some of the serious problems fouling the environment and ruining the health of our home planet. We haven’t even touched on many other quality of life concerns: education, medical care, traffic congestion, waste disposal, crime, war, violence, etc.
(By 1975, world population increased to over 4,000,000,000.)
What is the cause of all these societal problems and global degradation? Some readers might examine one issue at a time–global warming, water and food shortages, etc.– to look at causes and solutions. Some may think they can find answers by reading between the lines. In this brief essay, more astute readers merely need to read between the paragraphs in this essay to recognize a major contributor to all these problems.
(In 2011, world population reached 7,000,000,000.)
It shouldn’t be hard to grasp, but for too many it is: humans have been and will continue proliferating at a far faster pace than the Earth can handle. When the consequences of overpopulation are widely understood–and when human impact is acknowledged and resistance to population control overcome–only then can we begin reversing this dangerous course. Only then will there be a realistic hope of healing and saving the only planet we have. The longer we wait, the harsher the consequences.
(By 2050, the population of the world is expected to be about 9,300,000,000.)
13 Comments on "Are 7 Billion People Too Many?"
Makati1 on Sat, 21st Jun 2014 9:43 pm
If the West stopped it’s plundering, polluting and programs of genocide in the 3rd world, there would be room for 7 billion, but not at, or anywhere near, Western standards of waste. People were, and are, quite happy with the basics of life and close family and friends. Only the brainwashed West think otherwise.
We are here because of Western practices over the last 100+ years. Or should I say capitalist, for profit, practices. There is NO room for the tens, maybe hundreds, of millions who live off of the work of others. They should go, and will, when the SHTF and it all collapses into chaos. Those who leech off of the blood of others will be among the first to die because they are already hated by their hosts and are obvious.
A certain French lady said, “Let them eat cake!” and then lost her head … along with the rest of the leeches of the day. Maybe we should build a few guillotines for future investment/use?
JS on Sun, 22nd Jun 2014 2:02 am
The world population will soon decline, be it from falling fertility rates, which are occuring world wide, or famine and war. Peak oil means the destruction of the conformist, black-haird, brown-eyed world envisioned by pinko racists. Without the oil the food production will fall and then the 3rd world will die, and Asia with it as they cannot feed their own people without imports. Any stupid racist dogs who think they can ‘take’ the resources from others better be aware that people do shoot back! And likely with nuclear weapons.
Mike in Calif. on Sun, 22nd Jun 2014 2:07 am
Awww. Nothing like the vengeful wet-dreams of a Marxist wannabe. Wake up, little sleepy-head.
Most Western countries will actually get through energy draw down much better than the Third World. The reason is, again, population. In general, European countries have populations roughly twice their historical and demonstrably sustainable population. In other words, they’re in about 2x overshoot vis-a-vis 1900 tech. They may not drive cars, but at least they’ll eat.
Most Third World countries are in much higher degrees of overshoot and will suffer accordingly. This goes against the prevailing wisdom on this site. The usual argument is that because 3W country X is already in a low-tech, low-energy economy, it will just shrug its shoulders and carry-on when outside systems collapse. Not so. In these countries, internal trade and distribution relies on international trade. Whatever governmental authority exists, depends on outside recognition and assistance (foreign aid, heavy arms, technical advisers). In most 3W countries, things will breakdown and stay broken while the region (no longer a country) reverts to 1800.
So if you’re going to kill off those pesky White, Western, European, Aryan bastards, you’re going to need more than guillotines. You’re going to need an army. Good luck with that.
The US is a special case. Given its resources and superlative food production, it ~could~ breeze through this century with just a little discipline. But its problems are too great and its predilections too strong. It is 90+% urbanized on inappropriate infrastructure. Its government is increasingly greedy, corrupt and divided. Its multi-ethnic experiment threatens Balkanization. Its entitlement programs are overstretched. Its manufacturing is gutted. Its still copious energy sources are being squandered. When a serious crisis arrives, a bitter left/right civil war is likely.
It’s going to be an ugly century.
dashster on Sun, 22nd Jun 2014 2:14 am
Makati1: Can you go into more detail on how hundreds of millions of people are leeching off of others?
Arthur2 on Sun, 22nd Jun 2014 3:07 am
There is no difference between the survival needs of say a Philipino or a westerner: 2 liter of water/day, fresh air, shelter, a few potatoes. The bottom needs are the same. Yes, a westerner has much more to lose and will lose a lot more than 3W, but still will be a lot further away from the absolute minimum. From a resource perspective, north-America is one of the best places to be in this dark, nasty century. The downside of NA is its diversity and risk of ethnic conflict, which either could lead to balkanization, or Washington establishing an authoritarian/totalitarian police state.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Sun, 22nd Jun 2014 5:25 am
Mak, the west is in general already declining which is a good thing if collapse of some sort is in the pipeline. The west’s population is stabilizing and economic activity is in decline. The third world especially Asia/Africa are seeing huge population growth into unsupportable mega cities. Asia is developing away its farm land, deforesting its few remaining forests, and abusing its dying oceans. The same is true in North America and Europe but with smaller population densities the effects are proportionately less. Heavy industry and export lead low value industry has migrated to Asia. These industries are very environmentally damaging. Mak a less complex and poorer world will not need the plastic junk from China and the cheap cloths from the P’s.
Art/Mike, the question on North America and Europe is how will the social fabric hold with a decent? The lower population and higher food potential dynamics will allow a negotiation of the worst of the coming food insecurity. The Europeans and more so the North Americans have further to fall but have more room for a landing than Asia/Africa. Population dynamics is the key to this equation when reduction of economic activity and complexity occur. This has always been the case in history. Asia is just too far into overshoot to avoid some of these nastier collapse outcomes. Likewise Africa has insurmountable issues with its population explosion.
Mak, a further criticism of your flawed promotion of the Asian population issues is we in the west don’t want more Asian to support. That is what you are promoting. You Asians can’t support what you have currently. Mak, your promo is the west needs to consume less so Asian can consume more by having an increasing population. This promo is somehow in your mind fair. What is fair is no more population growth and everyone needs to do less with less. The “Mak promo” is further flawed by the fact these Asians are consuming more. Asia is the double negative in the world overshoot calculations of more people and consumption. I whole heartedly agree the west must consume less but not so Asia/Africa can have unsupportable population growth. More people means more problems with all important sustainability issues. The west needs to drop consumption to take care of itself within better sustainability dynamics relative to an economic and complexity decent not support more Asians/Africans.
Makati1 on Sun, 22nd Jun 2014 7:04 am
dashter… glad to:
1. The Capitalist Stock Market Casino gamblers and manipulators.
2. Government bots, by the tens of millions.
3. Central banksters and their cronies.
4. Those who live by death in the form of weapons systems and eternal wars.
5. Anyone who lives by interest, investments, financial manipulation, etc.
6. Economists.
7. And on and on.
The leeches of this world are multiplying faster then that producers. That is why the world is crashing. Total employed in the US, about 100 million. Number of government ’employees’ in the US, 22 million plus. Not counting all those working indirectly as in government grants, various security corporations spying on Americans, and the many other NGOs sponsored by the government around the world. And that is only the US. The word total is likely to be well over 1/2 billion leeches, not counting the billion or so who ‘invest’ in the Market Casino and don’t work for a living.
I also think that inheritances should never be more to an individual, than a years average wage in the country where you live. Some of the biggest leeches are those who inherit huge wealth and then use it to destroy others while getting even richer. Since it is too late, we will all suffer from their psychopathic lives. From the Rothschilds to Bill Gates, they are all guilty of genocide in huge numbers.
Makati1 on Sun, 22nd Jun 2014 7:11 am
Arthur2, for my grand kids, I hope you are right, but I doubt it. The real US, not the one you read about in the MSM ‘news’ is not a nice place even today. What happens when those 47 million stop getting food stamps? How about the 22 million on illegal drugs, or the hundred million or soon prescription drugs? How about when the 20% of you food that is imported today stops? When the grain belt dries up and blows away? When California is desert? When hurricanes start being more and bigger? Have you forgotten about climate change? Howe about the 100+ nuclear time bombs scattered over the 48? The 250 million arms in the hands of those 47 million or those 22 million or those 200 million?
No, the 3rd world will be much better off than the USSA. The fall is going to be bruising for us, but it will be bone breaking fatal to you. Wait and see.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Sun, 22nd Jun 2014 7:40 am
Mak, I am adding new Asian and African mouths to feed to your list. They eat because of exports of grain from the west. By your “Mak” definition that is leaching.
Kenz300 on Sun, 22nd Jun 2014 10:26 am
Endless population growth is not sustainable and will only lead to more poverty, suffering and despair.
Birth Control Permanent Methods: Learn About Effectiveness
http://www.emedicinehealth.com/birth_control_permanent_methods/article_em.htm
noobtube on Sun, 22nd Jun 2014 10:29 am
The “West” is so out-of-touch with reality, they think that a collapse will affect the producers more than the consumers.
This is a “Western” world system. So, in what world do you have to be, to believe that a collapse of a “Western” world system will destroy anything other than the “West” way of life?
Africa is a producer.
Europe and the United States are consumers.
Africa has either the same or a lower population density than Europe and the United States, yet uses a fraction of the energy of a European and a small percentage of an American.
There are no African corporations in Europe or the United States.
There are no African mining, drilling, or agri-businesses in Europe or the United States.
So, how does the typical “Western” leech think that the collapse of their world system will hurt anyone but themselves?
Juan Pueblo on Sun, 22nd Jun 2014 9:23 pm
Seven billion are too many for me, no matter how we live. I believe a population of less than a billion would be much better.
I don’t believe we will deal properly with this matter as a species and that’s the main reason why I had a Vasectomy and my wife and I chose to be childfree.
I hope with all my heart that I am wrong about this, but I believe we will destroy the planet one way or another sooner or later and I didn’t want my child to have to live through what’s coming.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Sun, 22nd Jun 2014 9:33 pm
Juan, good choice I have the worries of my kids on my mind. I have lived a good life but they have so much ahead of them and within a short time life is going to be tough. My life is currently focused on there happiness because I know the ability to give them a good life could be limited