5 ms·

If all the world population lived in a area as densely populated as Tokyo, they could all live inside Texas. And given we have great fission engineering, impro

If all the world population lived in a area as densely populated as Tokyo, they could all live inside Texas. And given we have great fission engineering, improving solar and wind power generation, and most of the world could easily improve land productivity, we aren't even close to a population cap.

petra 11y ago
If we're taking into account growing food using bio-industry in bioreactors,etc - we might even be able to do so at 10x-100x larger densities.
- nosuchthing 11y ago
  Speaking purely utilitarian that may be true. In practice though it's not that easy. Good luck convincing people on how wasteful and pollutant beef production is, or solving the issue of affordable housing for the masses near city centers. I'd be interested in seeing a city-state attempt to design a modern planned-city architecture incorporating local food production. Maybe even something akin to Paolo Soleri's 'Archology' ; https://www.google.com/search?q=paolo+soleri&biw=1303&bih=785&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&#tbs=ic:gray&tbm=isch&q=paolo+soleri+arcology https://www.google.com/search?q=paolo+soleri&biw=1303&bih=78...
  - petra 11y ago
    >> Good luck convincing people In a world with a real pressing population problem, coupled with good alternatives(meatless meat that's good as the real thing, healthier ,cheaper, marketed well) it seems doable. >> local food production. In the grand scale of things, i'm not sure that's a huge problem. food miles are just 10% of food emissions, and we have some other ways to get rid of that(clean transport, greenhouses spread around cities) that seem more practical. But if you're interested, there's some interesting research on large-scale vertical agriculture[pdf]: http://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/jas/article/download/4526/3952 http://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/jas/article/down... But to build it would be expensive - 200 million euro, and as far as i can remember , it wasn't price competitive.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
  - bloaf 11y ago
    You don't have to do any convincing. If people are starving, they will eat your vegi-mass. If people have no other alternatives, they will live in your people-pods.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
l33tbro 11y ago
The problem always comes back to existing systems. Trade agreements, beef between nations, religions and ethnicities, etc. coming up with sustainable solutions is great, but dismantling these deeply entrenched institutions and shifting the emotional realities of the uneducated and the despots will take hundreds of years.
TeMPOraL 11y ago
> If all the world population lived in a area as densely populated as Tokyo, they could all live inside Texas. We could fit even more people if we're willing to self-factory-farm ourselves, but I think people won't be happy living like mass-produced poultry.
- ableal 11y ago
  I don't know about happy, but the most expensive real estate in the world is in very densely populated places, such as New York City, San Francisco, London and, yeah, Tokyo. So, if not happy, at least willing. Or Montana and the Gobi desert would be hella more expensive.

petra 11y ago

If we're taking into account growing food using bio-industry in bioreactors,etc - we might even be able to do so at 10x-100x larger densities.

nosuchthing 11y ago
Speaking purely utilitarian that may be true. In practice though it's not that easy. Good luck convincing people on how wasteful and pollutant beef production is, or solving the issue of affordable housing for the masses near city centers. I'd be interested in seeing a city-state attempt to design a modern planned-city architecture incorporating local food production. Maybe even something akin to Paolo Soleri's 'Archology' ; https://www.google.com/search?q=paolo+soleri&biw=1303&bih=785&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&#tbs=ic:gray&tbm=isch&q=paolo+soleri+arcology https://www.google.com/search?q=paolo+soleri&biw=1303&bih=78...
- petra 11y ago
  >> Good luck convincing people In a world with a real pressing population problem, coupled with good alternatives(meatless meat that's good as the real thing, healthier ,cheaper, marketed well) it seems doable. >> local food production. In the grand scale of things, i'm not sure that's a huge problem. food miles are just 10% of food emissions, and we have some other ways to get rid of that(clean transport, greenhouses spread around cities) that seem more practical. But if you're interested, there's some interesting research on large-scale vertical agriculture[pdf]: http://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/jas/article/download/4526/3952 http://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/jas/article/down... But to build it would be expensive - 200 million euro, and as far as i can remember , it wasn't price competitive.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- bloaf 11y ago
  You don't have to do any convincing. If people are starving, they will eat your vegi-mass. If people have no other alternatives, they will live in your people-pods.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

l33tbro 11y ago

The problem always comes back to existing systems. Trade agreements, beef between nations, religions and ethnicities, etc. coming up with sustainable solutions is great, but dismantling these deeply entrenched institutions and shifting the emotional realities of the uneducated and the despots will take hundreds of years.

TeMPOraL 11y ago

> If all the world population lived in a area as densely populated as Tokyo, they could all live inside Texas. We could fit even more people if we're willing to self-factory-farm ourselves, but I think people won't be happy living like mass-produced poultry.

ableal 11y ago
I don't know about happy, but the most expensive real estate in the world is in very densely populated places, such as New York City, San Francisco, London and, yeah, Tokyo. So, if not happy, at least willing. Or Montana and the Gobi desert would be hella more expensive.