Joined: Apr 12, 2007 Posts: 1162 Location: Central NC
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 7:45 am Post subject: Re: Malthus, the false prophet
OilFinder2 wrote:
BigTex wrote:
Except the amount of arable land is not increasing at all.
How do you know? And since production has been increasing, why would it matter?
Infinite willful ignorance aside,
"Worldwide the amount of cropland per capita has declined due to population growth. North America and the former USSR have substantially more cropland per capita than the rest of the world.
The first global survey of soil degradation was carried out by the United nations in 1988-91. This survey, known as GLASOD - for Global Survey of Human-Induced Soil Degradation, has shown significant problems in virtually all parts of the world. The yellow line in each panel shows the global cropland area per person. Obviously, this indicator is a function of two factors: human population and cropland area. It has shown a steady decline in the 30 years from 1961 to 1991, amounting to a decrease of between 20 and 30%. The figure illustrates the regional changes that have accompanied this global change. North and central America and the former USSR are regions with significantly higher cropland areas per capita. However, all regions, including these, have shown decreases. South America croplands have declined at a rate that is slower than the global average, while African per capita croplands have declined at a greater than average rate."
Link: link
There are some very good charts as well. Someone who knows how to post them here, please do.
Joined: Apr 12, 2007 Posts: 1162 Location: Central NC
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 11:05 am Post subject: Re: Malthus, the false prophet
"Key charts, maps and statistics about the world's food supply and global soil"
""Over the past 40 years, approximately 30% of the world's cropland has become unproductive."2
"During the past 40 years nearly one-third of the world's cropland (1.5 billion hectares) has been abandoned because of soil erosion and degradation." 7
"About 2 million hectares of rainfed and irrigated agricultural lands are lost to production every year due to severe land degradation, among other factors." 8
"It takes approximately 500 years to replace 25 millimeters (1 inch) of topsoil lost to erosion. The minimal soil depth for agricultural production is 150 millimeters. From this perspective, productive fertile soil is a nonrenewable, endangered ecosystem."
Link: link
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 4:27 pm Post subject: Re: Malthus, the false prophet
OilFinder2 wrote:
BigTex wrote:
Any growth rate above 0% is exponential over time.
Then the same is true of agricultural production growth: Coarse Grain Chart
That graph looks pretty linear to me. _________________ "Who knows what the Second Law of Thermodynamics will be like in a hundred years?" - Economist speaking during planning for World Population Conference in early 1970s
Joined: Aug 03, 2006 Posts: 4071 Location: Graceland
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 4:57 pm Post subject: Re: Malthus, the false prophet
CrudeAwakening wrote:
OilFinder2 wrote:
BigTex wrote:
Any growth rate above 0% is exponential over time.
Then the same is true of agricultural production growth: [url=]http://www.cbot.com/cbot/pub/static/files/c_wcgprod.gif]Coarse Grain Chart[/url]
That graph looks pretty linear to me.
More importantly, I just don't see anything in the future that would make food production growth exponential. There will not be another fossil fuel catalyst to dramatically boost food production.
I am concerned about whether it will be possible to even maintain current levels of food production going forward. Where in the past we had strong food production tailwinds (e.g., Green Revolution), we now seem to have a cluster of headwinds--e.g., global warming, crop disease, high fuel costs, high commodity costs, bee die-off, etc. _________________
Joined: Aug 03, 2006 Posts: 4071 Location: Graceland
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 11:00 pm Post subject: Re: Malthus, the false prophet
OilFinder2 wrote:
BigTex wrote:
More importantly, I just don't see anything in the future that would make food production growth exponential.
World agricultural production does not need to be any more "exponential" than does population growth.
The reassuring part of that population graph is just a projection.
The steep part is what has actually happened.
Maybe feeding people won't be a problem. Every commodity boom in history has burst at some point. I'm the one who started the "Will Food Prices Collapse?" thread.
But Malthus's logic, and the overshoot analysis in general, is solid.
Can you cite any example of a species voluntarily limiting its growth? _________________
Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 1030 Location: Seattle
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 11:10 pm Post subject: Re: Malthus, the false prophet
BigTex wrote:
Can you cite any example of a species voluntarily limiting its growth?
Yes, Homo sapiens. Though I suppose one could argue whether that trend is "voluntary" or not. The decreasing rate of world population growth is because of the demographic transition, which essentially says that as a nation becomes wealthier and more urban, its population growth rate declines. There is some choice involved in this, but it also is a sort-of inexorable force with few or no exceptions. So perhaps we could call it "semi-voluntary." _________________ Abundance - what a concept!
Joined: Aug 03, 2006 Posts: 4071 Location: Graceland
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 11:35 pm Post subject: Re: Malthus, the false prophet
OilFinder2 wrote:
BigTex wrote:
Can you cite any example of a species voluntarily limiting its growth?
Yes, Homo sapiens. Though I suppose one could argue whether that trend is "voluntary" or not. The decreasing rate of world population growth is because of the demographic transition, which essentially says that as a nation becomes wealthier and more urban, its population growth rate declines. There is some choice involved in this, but it also is a sort-of inexorable force with few or no exceptions. So perhaps we could call it "semi-voluntary."
Hmm, did you notice that the only negative growth rates are projected in the future? None of that has actually happened yet, so it is not an example of a population voluntarily limiting its growth.
We are still growing.
Also, if the demographic transition depends upon nations becoming wealthier (and thus more resource intensive), what happens if this economic expansion stalls? _________________
Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 1030 Location: Seattle
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 11:50 pm Post subject: Re: Malthus, the false prophet
BigTex wrote:
Hmm, did you notice that the only negative growth rates are projected in the future? None of that has actually happened yet, so it is not an example of a population voluntarily limiting its growth.We are still growing.
So what? We're growing at a decreasing rate, and have been doing so since the 60's. You did not ask me for an example of a species which voluntarily decreased its growth, you asked me for an example of a species "voluntarily limiting its growth."
BigTex wrote:
Also, if the demographic transition depends upon nations becoming wealthier (and thus more resource intensive), what happens if this economic expansion stalls?
Not sure which economic expansion you're talking about. The 3rd World - which is the part of the world with the highest population growth rates - is also the part of the world which tends to have the highest economic growth rates: Economic Growth Rate of all World Nations
In other words, the nations which need the most economic growth to encourage them to undergo the demographic transition are the ones which happen to be undergoing the fastest economic growth anyway. _________________ Abundance - what a concept!
Joined: Aug 03, 2006 Posts: 4071 Location: Graceland
Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 12:00 am Post subject: Re: Malthus, the false prophet
OilFinder2 wrote:
BigTex wrote:
Hmm, did you notice that the only negative growth rates are projected in the future? None of that has actually happened yet, so it is not an example of a population voluntarily limiting its growth.
We are still growing.
So what? We're growing at a decreasing rate, and have been doing so since the 60's. You did not ask me for an example of a species which voluntarily decreased its growth, you asked me for an example of a species "voluntarily limiting its growth."
BigTex wrote:
Also, if the demographic transition depends upon nations becoming wealthier (and thus more resource intensive), what happens if this economic expansion stalls?
Not sure which economic expansion you're talking about. The 3rd World - which is the part of the world with the highest population growth rates - is also the part of the world which tends to have the highest economic growth rates:
--> Economic Growth Rate of all World Nations <--
In other words, the nations which need the most economic growth to encourage them to undergo the demographic transition are the ones which happen to be undergoing the fastest economic growth anyway.
Joined: Sep 14, 2004 Posts: 6160 Location: Rural Virginia
Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 7:02 am Post subject: Re: Malthus, the false prophet
OilFinder2 wrote:
BigTex wrote:
Can you cite any example of a species voluntarily limiting its growth?
Yes, Homo sapiens.Though I suppose one could argue whether that trend is "voluntary" or not. The decreasing rate of world population growth is because of the demographic transition, which essentially says that as a nation becomes wealthier and more urban, its population growth rate declines. There is some choice involved in this, but it also is a sort-of inexorable force with few or no exceptions. So perhaps we could call it "semi-voluntary."
Well, I see this moronic argument goes on.
The falling growth rate is unimportant, considering that we've already exceeded the sustainable carrying capacity by a factor of 2 or 3.
The fact that we are still growing at all is infinitely more important than the fact that the rate is falling. As it is, we're still headed for another doubling within a short period. We are going to pay and pay and pay for this, individually and collectively. Living standards and lifespans are going to fall, first in the developed countries (this is already starting to happen) and later in the developing ones.
And in the end---population crash, that inflexible rule of nature. _________________ "Actually, humans died out long ago."
---Abused, abandoned hunting dog
"Things have entered a stage where the only change that is possible is for things to get worse."
---Me and my brother
Joined: Apr 12, 2007 Posts: 1162 Location: Central NC
Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 8:03 am Post subject: Re: Malthus, the false prophet
OilFinder2 wrote:
BigTex wrote:
Hmm, did you notice that the only negative growth rates are projected in the future? None of that has actually happened yet, so it is not an example of a population voluntarily limiting its growth. We are still growing
So what? We're growing at a decreasing rate, and have been doing so since the 60's. You did not ask me for an example of a species which voluntarily decreased its growth, you asked me for an example of a species "voluntarily limiting its growth."
BigTex wrote:
Also, if the demographic transition depends upon nations becoming wealthier (and thus more resource intensive), what happens if this economic expansion stalls?
Not sure which economic expansion you're talking about. The 3rd World - which is the part of the world with the highest population growth rates - is also the part of the world which tends to have the highest economic growth rates:
--> Economic Growth Rate of all World Nations <--
In other words, the nations which need the most economic growth to encourage them to undergo the demographic transition are the ones which happen to be undergoing the fastest economic growth anyway.
OF2, The drivers of demographic transition are education, urbanization of the population, women employed in a cash society. So, an inexorable result is increasing consumption of goods and services. That is causing global demand for those goods and services to go up. Global grain production per capita, energy production per capita, loss of arable farmland due to urbanization, erosion, salinization, desertification. I'm sure you will ignore facts that don't fit your argument, but that won't change the outcome.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
