It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Oppinions on where are we going as the increase in population in the past 100 years is close to 5 Bi

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 02:29 PM
link   
This is from WORLD POPULATION DRAFT ........UNICEF



If, for the sake of illustration, the fertility of countries is kept constant at 1995-2000 levels, the world population soars to 244 billion by 2150 and 134 trillion in 2300.

All
of this increase occurs in the less developed regions, whose population rises from 4.9 billion today to 134 trillion in 2300. In sharp contrast, the population of the more developed regions declines from 1.2
billion in 2000 to 0.6 billion in 2300 were its fertility to remain constant at current levels.
Among the less developed regions, Africa, with its very high current fertility levels, grows most rapidly, passing from 0.8 billion in 2000 to 115 trillion in 2300 in the illustrative constant-fertility scenario.

All scenarios result in significant shifts in the geographical distribution of the world population
(tables 2 and 3). According to the medium scenario, the share of Africa doubles (passing from 13 per
cent of the world population in 2000 to 24 per cent in 2300), whereas that of

Asia is reduced by
about ten per cent (from 61 per cent in 2000 to 55 per cent in 2300) and that of Europe by about half
(from 12 per cent in 2000 to 7 per cent in 2300).

According to the medium scenario, China, India and the United States are and will continue to be the
most populous countries of the world until 2300. By 2050, India is expected to have surpassed China
in population size and will remain as the most populous country in the world thereafter. However,
between 2000 and 2100, the three most populous countries are expected to account for a declining
share of the world population, passing from 43 per cent in 2000 to 34 per cent in 2100. Their share is
then expected to rise slightly and remain at about 35 per cent until 2300.

In the medium scenario, the number of countries accounting for 75 per cent of the world population is
expected to increase from 24 in 2000 to 29 in 2100 and to remain unchanged thereafter. This relative
stability in terms of total population belies the major changes projected in terms of the contribution of
different countries to population increase or decrease. In the medium scenario, the annual change of
world population is projected to decrease steadily from 77 million in 2003 to -14 million in 2010-
2015 and then to rise steadily until it becomes positive again in 2175-2180 (figure 2)

You can read the whole draft at the following link :

www.un.org...




posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 02:32 PM
link   
provided by Cornell University:



ne hundred years from now, democratically determined population- control practices and sound resource-management policies could have the planet's 2 billion people thriving in harmony with the environment. Lacking these approaches, a new Cornell University study suggests, 12 billon miserable humans will suffer a difficult life on Earth by the year 2100.

"Of course, reducing population and using resources wisely will be a challenging task in the coming decades," says David Pimentel, lead author of the report titled "Will Limits of the Earth's Resources Control Human Numbers?" in the first issue of the journal Environment, Development and Sustainability.

"It will be much more difficult," Pimentel says, "to survive in a world without voluntary controls on population growth and ever diminishing supplies of the Earth's resources."

Even at a reduced world population of 2 billion in AD 2100, life for the average Earth dweller will not be as luxurious as it is for many Americans today. But the lifestyle won't be as wasteful of resources, either, the Cornell ecologist predicts. Some observers are seeing early signs that nature is taking a hand at reducing human populations through malnutrition and disease. According to the report, global climate change is beginning to contribute to the food and disease problems.

"With a democratically determined population policy that respects basic individual rights, with sound resource-use policies, plus the support of science and technology to enhance energy supplies and protect the integrity of the environment," the report concludes, "an optimum population of 2 billion for the Earth can be achieved."

Then the fortunate 2 billion will be free from poverty and starvation, living in an environment capable of sustaining human life with dignity, the report suggests, adding a cautionary note: "We must avoid letting human numbers continue to increase and surpass the limit of Earth's natural resources and forcing natural forces to control our number by disease, malnutrition and violent conflicts over resources."

Among the key points in the report:

* The world population is projected to double in about 50 years.
* Even if a worldwide limit of 2.1 children per couple were adopted tomorrow, Earth's human population would continue to increase before stabilizing at around 12 billion in more than 60 years. The major reason for continued growth is "population momentum," due to the predominantly young age structure of the world population.
* The US population has doubled during the past 60 years to 270 million and, at the current growth rate, is projected to double again, to 540 million, in the next 75 years. Each year our nation adds 3 million people (including legal immigrants) to its population, plus an estimated 400,000 illegal immigrants.
* Increasing US and global population will place restrictions on certain freedoms: freedom to travel and commute to work quickly and efficiently, freedom to visit and enjoy natural areas, freedom to select desired foods and freedom to be effectively represented by government
* Today, more than 3 billion people suffer from malnutrition, the largest number and proportion of the world population in history, according to the World Health Organization. Malnutrition increases the susceptibility to diseases such as diarrhea and malaria.
* One reason for the increase in malnutrition is that per capita production of grain has been declining since 1983. Grains provide 80 percent to 90 percent of the world's food. Each additional human further reduces available food per capita.
* The reasons for this per capita decrease in food production are a 20 percent decline in cropland per capita, a 15 percent decrease in water for irrigation and a 23 percent drop in the use of fertilizers.
* Biotechnology and other technologies apparently have not been implemented fast enough to prevent declines in per capita food production during the past 17 years.
* Considering the resources likely to be available in AD 2100, the optimal world population would be about 2 billion, with a standard of living about half that of the United States in the 1990s, or at the standard experienced by the average European.

The study was funded by Cornell University. In addition to Pimentel, authors of the Environment, Development and Sustainability report include Owen Bailey, Paul Kim, Elizabeth Mullaney, Joy Calabrese, Laura Walman, Fred Nelson nd Xiangjun Yao, all students at Cornell University.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by lisa2012
 


Very interesting stats. I won't be around but my daughter will be an I hope for the best. The idea of living in harmony with each other and the environment sounds so appealing.

I've already personally seen the US population grow since the 60's. And it's disturbing. I can't imagine the continued growth and how miserable it will be before it gets better.



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 09:52 AM
link   
To sustain the rising population into the future, we need to massively increase productivity - otherwise, people starve even more than they are now. The ONLY ways we can do this is through newer technology that helps us increase productivity. Remember, the same ideas for population control started over a hundred years ago - they were proved WRONG because our productivity is higher than it was a hundred years ago.

Recourses? Use Nuclear power to make huge amounts of electricity, huge amounts of hydrogen for fuel, and furthermore huge amounts of fresh water. Make food in factories.


[edit on 3/9/2009 by C0bzz]



posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 12:59 PM
link   
UNICEF and Cornell are connected to.... ?



new topics

top topics
 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join