5 ms·

This is one of the major cause of the destruction of the environment we're seeing globally. All forecasts predict another 60% (!!) increase in global populatio

This is one of the major cause of the destruction of the environment we're seeing globally. All forecasts predict another 60% (!!) increase in global population before it stabilises. Forget about banning plastic straws or flying less (which are feel-good measures more than anything else) with such numbers... We need to take dramatic and effective steps. There are 80 years left until the end of the century. This increase is far from being inevitable! But, again, we prefer to ignore these key issues and focus on marginal, feel-good measures instead.

roca 7y ago
Perhaps you didn't read the article, because its main point is that the official UN forecast is for world population to essentially flatten out at 10.9B around 2100, which is 40% more than today, not 60%.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- NotPaidToPost 7y ago
  11B from 7B is a 60% increase... But that's the usual sterile nitpicking. Do you want to argue about decimal points or address the actual point? The important point is that this is a large increase when we already cannot manage now.
  - Retric 7y ago
    10.9/7.53 = 1.45, but that 10.9 has high error bars. The U.N. estimation is a 80% chance it’s between 10 and 12 Billion in 80 years. https://population.un.org/wpp/Graphs/Probabilistic/POP/TOT/900 https://population.un.org/wpp/Graphs/Probabilistic/POP/TOT/9... That’s quite a bit of uncertainty to make any real definitive statements beyond continuing growth expected.
    - beat 7y ago
      As a point of comparison, the global population has almost quadrupled in the previous 80 years. So even in the worst case scenario, population growth is dropping spectacularly.
      - Retric 7y ago
        Absolutely, the trends seem very obvious. The global population is unlikely to double in the next 100 years. I am mostly simply reacting to people trying to use specific estimates.
  - bryanlarsen 7y ago
    "we already cannot manage now." Correction: we don't want to manage now. The world has far more than enough wealth and resources to hold climate change to 2 degrees and to stop clear cutting rain forests.
    - ForHackernews 7y ago
      Point of order: 2 degrees of climate change will still be disastrous https://www.rifters.com/crawl/?p=8433 https://www.rifters.com/crawl/?p=8433
    - ataturk 7y ago
      By "wealth and resources" do you mean a full scale invasion of Brazil? That's the level of effort it would to possibly accomplish what you suggest. I think a lot of you are very taken in by "climate science." I remain skeptical. Were it not so tied to political ideology it might be more palatable. But I'm unwilling to give up any more ground to the far left at this point. I don't care how good their argument for this or that is, I'm simply not listening anymore. They will have to come and kill me as I am no longer interested in complying with their administrative state and it's unelected idiots.
  - beat 7y ago
    We can and do manage now, thank you very much. Poverty is decreasing at an incredible rate around the globe; education is increasing at an incredible rate. We've made the world's knowledge available to virtually everyone via in the internet just in the time I've been an adult. We've eradicated diseases that once killed millions every year. Two thirds of the global extreme poverty (defined by the World Bank as about $1.80/day in current dollars) has been eradicated in just the past two decades. We're doing awesome.
    - NotPaidToPost 7y ago
      I was obviously not writing about poverty but about our impact on the planet and the environment...
      - beat 7y ago
        I expect to see fossil fuel use as a major energy source eradicated within my lifetime. The planet is just fine; it's our own living environment we need to worry about. Earth has survived worse things than mere humans.
    - adrianN 7y ago
      We also have about ten years of carbon budget left if we want to avoid the worst climate change yet our emission rate is still increasing. Permafrost is already melting much faster than the pessimistic models assumed, so it might already be too late to prevent the release of the absurd amount of carbon locked in the ice.
Certhas 7y ago
This increase is essentially unavoidable at this point in time. It happens despite the fact that fertile couples now only reproduce at replacement rate. But older smaller generations get replaced by larger younger generations. There is a multi decadal lag in population dynamics.
rcMgD2BwE72F 7y ago
Why forget about the easiest steps if we need dramatic ones? Why should rich people continue to fly around the world while you try implementing big restrictions on everyone? This makes no sense. Perhaps you meant "In addition to bans on (...), we need dramatic measures"? Also, suggesting some steps would help understand how stronger your proposals are.
- spookware 7y ago
  People are flying around the world trying to figure out how to supply people like you solar pannels, wind turbines and batteries. Enviomental solutions require a suppy chain, R & D and new factories.

roca 7y ago

Perhaps you didn't read the article, because its main point is that the official UN forecast is for world population to essentially flatten out at 10.9B around 2100, which is 40% more than today, not 60%.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
NotPaidToPost 7y ago
11B from 7B is a 60% increase... But that's the usual sterile nitpicking. Do you want to argue about decimal points or address the actual point? The important point is that this is a large increase when we already cannot manage now.
- Retric 7y ago
  10.9/7.53 = 1.45, but that 10.9 has high error bars. The U.N. estimation is a 80% chance it’s between 10 and 12 Billion in 80 years. https://population.un.org/wpp/Graphs/Probabilistic/POP/TOT/900 https://population.un.org/wpp/Graphs/Probabilistic/POP/TOT/9... That’s quite a bit of uncertainty to make any real definitive statements beyond continuing growth expected.
  - beat 7y ago
    As a point of comparison, the global population has almost quadrupled in the previous 80 years. So even in the worst case scenario, population growth is dropping spectacularly.
    - Retric 7y ago
      Absolutely, the trends seem very obvious. The global population is unlikely to double in the next 100 years. I am mostly simply reacting to people trying to use specific estimates.
- bryanlarsen 7y ago
  "we already cannot manage now." Correction: we don't want to manage now. The world has far more than enough wealth and resources to hold climate change to 2 degrees and to stop clear cutting rain forests.
  - ForHackernews 7y ago
    Point of order: 2 degrees of climate change will still be disastrous https://www.rifters.com/crawl/?p=8433 https://www.rifters.com/crawl/?p=8433
  - ataturk 7y ago
    By "wealth and resources" do you mean a full scale invasion of Brazil? That's the level of effort it would to possibly accomplish what you suggest. I think a lot of you are very taken in by "climate science." I remain skeptical. Were it not so tied to political ideology it might be more palatable. But I'm unwilling to give up any more ground to the far left at this point. I don't care how good their argument for this or that is, I'm simply not listening anymore. They will have to come and kill me as I am no longer interested in complying with their administrative state and it's unelected idiots.
- beat 7y ago
  We can and do manage now, thank you very much. Poverty is decreasing at an incredible rate around the globe; education is increasing at an incredible rate. We've made the world's knowledge available to virtually everyone via in the internet just in the time I've been an adult. We've eradicated diseases that once killed millions every year. Two thirds of the global extreme poverty (defined by the World Bank as about $1.80/day in current dollars) has been eradicated in just the past two decades. We're doing awesome.
  - NotPaidToPost 7y ago
    I was obviously not writing about poverty but about our impact on the planet and the environment...
    - beat 7y ago
      I expect to see fossil fuel use as a major energy source eradicated within my lifetime. The planet is just fine; it's our own living environment we need to worry about. Earth has survived worse things than mere humans.
  - adrianN 7y ago
    We also have about ten years of carbon budget left if we want to avoid the worst climate change yet our emission rate is still increasing. Permafrost is already melting much faster than the pessimistic models assumed, so it might already be too late to prevent the release of the absurd amount of carbon locked in the ice.

Certhas 7y ago

This increase is essentially unavoidable at this point in time. It happens despite the fact that fertile couples now only reproduce at replacement rate. But older smaller generations get replaced by larger younger generations. There is a multi decadal lag in population dynamics.

rcMgD2BwE72F 7y ago

Why forget about the easiest steps if we need dramatic ones? Why should rich people continue to fly around the world while you try implementing big restrictions on everyone? This makes no sense. Perhaps you meant "In addition to bans on (...), we need dramatic measures"? Also, suggesting some steps would help understand how stronger your proposals are.

spookware 7y ago
People are flying around the world trying to figure out how to supply people like you solar pannels, wind turbines and batteries. Enviomental solutions require a suppy chain, R & D and new factories.