Can the planet sustain our rapid population growth?

8 posts / 0 new
Last post
Thom Hartmann A...
Thom Hartmann Administrator's picture

It’s the population, stupid!  The United Nations is warning that rapid population growth, which will likely see the number of humans living on the planet explode to 9 billion by 2040 – will condemn billions more to a life of poverty.  As the U.N. cautions in a new report – a surging population, “runs the risk of condemning up to 3 billion members of our human family to a life of endemic poverty.” 

By 2030 – the U.N. estimates the world will need to produce 50% more food, 45% more energy and 30% more water to sustain more people on the planet.  But, with new research showing that global demand for oil will outstrip oil supplies in the next few years – these targets cannot be met.  We should have been preparing for a world without oil back when President Carter told us to – and we need to educate and empower more women worldwide – which is the most effective way to curb population growth. 

Comments

Realist1948
Realist1948's picture
I was happy to hear one

I was happy to hear one caller mention the Monty Python song "Every Sperm is Sacred."  Lyrics are at

http://www.lyricsdepot.com/monty-python/every-sperm-is-sacred.html

But seriously...  the planet is finite, and there is an absolute limit on how many people there can be on this planet at a given time.  The only thing in doubt is how close to the absolute limit we will get.  IMHO our descendents would be better off if the global population were to gradually decline back to one billion or so.

rigel1
rigel1's picture
Thank you Thom for mentioning

Thank you Thom for mentioning this!!! For some reason liberals and conservatives have been whistling past the grave yard on this issue. It has been played down or ignored.

We don't need to find a solution yet. We need to start with awareness. Most people are clueless. Awareness and social pressure alone can solve a lot of issues. Lets get moving. 

polycarp2
The party is over in about a

The party is over in about a decade. Univ. of Colo. lecture: "Arithmetic, Population and Energy"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY

On another note, we have about 5 years left to address global warming before it's irreversable. We should probably get started.

Sending a corporate lacky (Obama) to Copenhagen to single handedly sabotage the global warming conference wasn't our greatest moment..

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disesae"

HowMany
HowMany's picture
Thanks Thom for mentioning

Thanks Thom for mentioning the “elephant in the room.” We need to talk about the social and environmental impacts of population growth and support positive and sustainable solutions. Empowering women is an excellent place to start – when they have more control over their own lives and bodies, including access to contraceptives, women tend to have more educational and employment opportunities, enhanced social and economic status and improved well-being of their families.

Another place to focus on is reducing consumption levels and promoting alternatives to economic growth (especially replacing GDP) on a planet with finite resources.

www.populationgrowth.org

www.howmany.org

 

Bush_Wacker
Bush_Wacker's picture
Soylent Green and Logan's Run

Soylent Green and Logan's Run come to mind. 

polycarp2
Bush_Wacker wrote: Soylent

Bush_Wacker wrote:

Soylent Green and Logan's Run come to mind. 

When deceased humans were turned into edible wafers, did they use an organic green dye or the toxic variety to increase food supplies?

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

rigel1
rigel1's picture
Okay. So how do we keep this

Okay. So how do we keep this issue on the front burner? Right now it's not even on the stove.