3 ms·
I'll focus on what I know, just one issue: We'll run out of food. In about 2025 the global population will start to surpass what can be sustained by the availa
by Blahah 13y ago
I'll focus on what I know, just one issue:
We'll run out of food. In about 2025 the global population will start to surpass what can be sustained by the available arable land in the world. We can't use more fertilisers or water (because most crops under intensive cultivation are already close to their theoretical maximum yields). We can't just use more land because it's not suitable for agriculture because of salinity, contamination, substrate or climate.
We are essentially fucked: unless we can increase the maximum yield potential of a whole suite of staple crops by ~50%, or make about 50% more land available for food production, famine starts to become a really big problem. It hasn't been that big of a problem since the mid-1900s. Famine means war, disease, death. Some of the most atrocious things humans have ever done were done because of famine.
There are some promising scientific efforts to raise potential crop yields underway, but as someone working on them I can tell you they probably won't be ready in time without massive changes in science funding or a series of lucky breakthroughs. It's still worth trying really, really hard, because this is the least painful way to prevent disaster.
An alternative is to completely restructure the way we produce food. Vertical farming is attractive if we can find the raw materials to make it happen, but that won't be feasible until people are already starving.
Another alternative is for everyone to stop eating meat. Animals are ~5-10x less efficient to produce in terms of input resources per calorie output than plants. I hope this happens. Cows first, then sheep, then pigs. Wiping out those three would have us covered.
After about 2050 the world population peaks and starts to decrease, then things get easier. But there's a good chance a whole shitload of people die very young, very painfully in the meantime.
- cm2012 13y agoMax world population will cap at 9,000,000,000 in 2050, not so much more than the 7,000,000,000 we have today. In actual risk of starvation, changing some meat farming to plants would solve supply issues pretty quick.
- Blahah 13y agoWorst-case UN estimates are ~13billion, 9billion is best-case and looking increasingly unlikely. I think we'll hit mid-11billion.
- kaybe 13y agoAssuming climate change doesn't get the better of a major percentage of our harvests.
- ASpring 13y agoOur current rate of climate change is a terrible thing, don't get me wrong. But as the planet warms, our current(mostly depleted) cropland will produce less while places closer to the poles will start being cultivated for similar crops.
- kaybe 13y agoLet's hope it will work out like that. A warmer world in equilibrium would not be the problem; our main problem is that we are set up for this configuration as stable (location of cities, local knowledge, crops, culture, ..) and it will be hard to adapt on the way to a new equilibrium, because the conditions are constantly changing.
- JackFr 13y agoThat just seems very unlikely. Forty -five years ago Paul Ehrlich wrote "The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate." Even if you agree with his central thesis, its fair to say that we're two generations removed from 1970, and we're not seeing what he predicted. And since 1970, the world hunger situation has almost uniformly improved. Now I certainly don't believe that the Earth has unlimited resources, and there is a finite capacity of arable land, but I think you may be very premature.
- Blahah 13y agoEhrlich wasn't wrong - hundreds of millions of people did die from starvation in the 1970s. Even in the 1990s, more than 100 million people died from starvation. Now ~8 million people die from starvation every year. You're right that the situation has got better since the 1970s, thanks to the Green Revolution and economic improvements. I've laid out why it's going to get worse again.
- mark_l_watson 13y agoI hope I can put your worries at least partially to rest: as you mention a vegetarian diet for everyone would use about 90% less water and energy to produce. The problem is corporate welfare: the big meat producers in the USA get $50billion a year in water subsidies -- that must stop.