First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
Post Reply Did you know death....
15947 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Cold and High
Offline
Posted 4/14/16 , edited 4/14/16
You didn't know it was #CurrentYear2016..?

312 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / No Where
Offline
Posted 4/14/16

TheOriginalStraynge wrote:


mxxlogk wrote:

Death is outnumbered by births in the world over 2 to 1 every day
http://www.worldometers.info/

at 7.4 Billion today kind of makes you wonder where our planetary resources will be at in 50 years.


Our planet can actually reasonably hold a lot more people than this. Our problem isn't with the numbers but what we are doing with our resources. We are consuming way too much and a lot more than what we need. One or two countries alone can consume more than 90% of the rest of the world which is just wrong. We just need to learn to be good custodians of this planet and to develop reusable resources. This whole scorch and burn tactics we are using will not sustain us indefinitely.

There is NO magical number that is the limit for population on Earth. This planet could easily support tens of billions of people and even more with proper resource management.

Here's some fun information that I found. It's a bit dated: around 2009 or so but it's information is still relevant.

According to the U.N. Population Database, the world's population in 2010 will be 6,908,688,000. The landmass of Texas is 268,820 sq mi (7,494,271,488,000 sq ft). So, divide 7,494,271,488,000 sq ft by 6,908,688,000 people, and you get 1084.76 sq ft/person. That's approximately a 33' x 33' plot of land for every person on the planet, enough space for a town house.

Given an average four person family, every family would have a 66' x 66' plot of land, which would comfortably provide a single family home and yard -- and all of them fit on a landmass the size of Texas. Admittedly, it'd basically be one massive subdivision, but Texas is a tiny portion of the inhabitable Earth.

Such an arrangement would leave the entire rest of the world vacant. There's plenty of space for humanity.


Yea I don't think too many people are really concerned by the square foot. When I talk population and resources, food clean water economic stability, oil, jobs, disease etc concerns come leagues before literally talking space to put people. The problem with property is politics and economics, countries have borders, governments have laws, you have to purchase land at market value. There is vast amounts of barren land, forest, jungle, desert, artic, back country, rural counties etc uninhabited world wide but people go where they can make money to afford life. A total space to person efficiency plan would some form of global communism that's never going to happen, and much worse scenarios are more likely before that would come to the table to solve having enough space for people like large scale war over resources and viable land left.

First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.