4 ms·

> 11.2 billion and still climbing by 2100. They really don't think any physical constraints are going to get in the way of that? There are only so many fish i

> 11.2 billion and still climbing by 2100. They really don't think any physical constraints are going to get in the way of that? There are only so many fish in the ocean.

xefer 9y ago
The biggest natural constraint was nitrogen fixation which places a natural limit of around 4 billion people. But artificial fertilizers basically took the lid of that and the population has been exploding since been the process was first industrialized. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9ef1/254c1b7626ae1c70f0718c0f811d11d990da.pdf https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9ef1/254c1b7626ae1c70f0718c...
WalterBright 9y ago
By then people will probably be mostly eating food created by an industrial process.
nl 9y ago
The short answer is that there are no real physical constraints. BUT there are some fairly important practical issues around unequal access to resources: some places have too much water and some don't have enough. Those kind of problems may lead to war, but probably won't stop population growth (short of it going large-scale nuclear or biological).
- oblio 9y ago
  Population growth in many regions has already plateaued. At least the natural change. Europe, North America, Russia, China, Japan. The main outliers right now are India and Africa. But even those are expected to cool off after their initial burst. The true constraint is administrative capacity: will these countries be able to grow their infrastructure and improve their resource management before they turn their countries into deserts? India will probably manage to, but some African countries probably won't. It's going to be quite bad for some unfortunate people living in these countries...
  - pbhjpbhj 9y ago
    When countries packed with people grow resource scarce then the richer nations either share their resources, commit genocide by starvation, or go to war to keep the resources they have. We can pack in more people but not if we hope to raise the living conditions of all those people. IMO those billions more are mainly going to be living hand-to-mouth in shanty towns. Whole countries living like that have little to lose by going to war to gain resources ...
jwfxpr 9y ago
To be fair, it makes no predictions that the global population of fish will be >0 in 2100.
ars 9y ago
> They really don't think any physical constraints are going to get in the way of that? With enough energy you are not constrained by resource limitations. For example irrigate the desert with desalinated water. It's a really big planet, you could fit a lot of people on it - and animals as well. It's all about energy.
- pbhjpbhj 9y ago
  Hmm, heard about the plummeting insect populations? Artificial pollination is possible but costly, the more we grow and adopt land solely for human populations; use pesticides to increase immediate crop yield; the more we remove natural ecosystems that currently act with our food production cycles.
  - mythrwy 9y ago
    Grains aren't pollinated by insects though. And domestic bees are brought in hives to many crops that are.

> 11.2 billion and still climbing by 2100. They really don't think any physical constraints are going to get in the way of that? There are only so many fish in the ocean.

xefer 9y ago

The biggest natural constraint was nitrogen fixation which places a natural limit of around 4 billion people. But artificial fertilizers basically took the lid of that and the population has been exploding since been the process was first industrialized. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9ef1/254c1b7626ae1c70f0718c0f811d11d990da.pdf https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9ef1/254c1b7626ae1c70f0718c...

WalterBright 9y ago

By then people will probably be mostly eating food created by an industrial process.

nl 9y ago

The short answer is that there are no real physical constraints. BUT there are some fairly important practical issues around unequal access to resources: some places have too much water and some don't have enough. Those kind of problems may lead to war, but probably won't stop population growth (short of it going large-scale nuclear or biological).

oblio 9y ago
Population growth in many regions has already plateaued. At least the natural change. Europe, North America, Russia, China, Japan. The main outliers right now are India and Africa. But even those are expected to cool off after their initial burst. The true constraint is administrative capacity: will these countries be able to grow their infrastructure and improve their resource management before they turn their countries into deserts? India will probably manage to, but some African countries probably won't. It's going to be quite bad for some unfortunate people living in these countries...
- pbhjpbhj 9y ago
  When countries packed with people grow resource scarce then the richer nations either share their resources, commit genocide by starvation, or go to war to keep the resources they have. We can pack in more people but not if we hope to raise the living conditions of all those people. IMO those billions more are mainly going to be living hand-to-mouth in shanty towns. Whole countries living like that have little to lose by going to war to gain resources ...

jwfxpr 9y ago

To be fair, it makes no predictions that the global population of fish will be >0 in 2100.

ars 9y ago

> They really don't think any physical constraints are going to get in the way of that? With enough energy you are not constrained by resource limitations. For example irrigate the desert with desalinated water. It's a really big planet, you could fit a lot of people on it - and animals as well. It's all about energy.

pbhjpbhj 9y ago
Hmm, heard about the plummeting insect populations? Artificial pollination is possible but costly, the more we grow and adopt land solely for human populations; use pesticides to increase immediate crop yield; the more we remove natural ecosystems that currently act with our food production cycles.
- mythrwy 9y ago
  Grains aren't pollinated by insects though. And domestic bees are brought in hives to many crops that are.