Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Global Population Crisis That Never Was

rogerpielkejr.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 280 posts

Re: The Global Population Crisis That Never Was

#41

Post by ericmay »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #33
jansan wrote: post #11

I never fails to puzzle me that a potential rising of the sea level of 50cm by 2050 resulting in 11% loss of land in Bangladesh is seen as a major threat, while at the same time its population growth that will roughly double in the same period is brushed off as nothing. Also, news tell us that in Syria climate change has resulted in food shortage in recent years. But having to feed twice as many people from the same…

A quick googling suggests that Bangladesh's current fertility rate is around 2 births per woman, which is actually just under replacement rate. The birth rate across the globe has been steadily on the decline for some time, there aren't many more places left where rapid doublings are still possible.

Sure, but I’d argue that the replacement rate itself is at an unsustainable level.

Climate change and the loss of species and such is one manifestation of overpopulation. Covid-19 could be viewed as another, in my opinion.

Obviously this is all rich coming from an American living in the suburbs (I don’t really see what my alternatives are), but I can’t help but think we can only sustain around a billion people without destroying the planet (speculation).

We live in a golden age of cheap energy and consumption. People get in gasoline powered cars and drive a mile down the road to get a snack. That’s impossible to maintain. Not only do we have overpopulation, but we built unsustainable cities, predicated on infinite cheap energy ($2.50 gas). Electric cars won’t fix this, although they’ll help.

Re: The Global Population Crisis That Never Was

#42

Post by yorwba »

0-_-0 wrote: post #37
jcelerier wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This combination of forces would lead inexorably to famine, unchecked migration, conflict and other calamities. ... and.. it does ? https://www.worldvision.org/refugees-news-stories

No mention of famine

If you just grep the list of articles for "famine", you'll miss the "malnourished children" and "hunger" mentioned in the articles.

Re: The Global Population Crisis That Never Was

#43

Post by captain_price7 »

rayiner wrote: post #17
jojobas wrote: post #13

There are way more people on Earth than Earth can sustain in what we consider a life worth living. As bloodthirsty capitalism pulls more and more people out of poverty we discover that putting a steak on everyone's table and a fresh car in everyone's garage is too taxing on the atmosphere, wildlife, forests and what not. We seem to have to choose between a smaller luxurious population and billions and billions of peo…

> There are way to many people on Earth than Earth can sustain in what we consider a life worth living This point of view comes up a lot in connection with climate change, and I always find it incredibly offensive. My dad was reminiscing the other day about his happy childhood growing up in a village in Bangladesh in the 1950s. This was back when 1 in 3 kids didn’t live to the age of 5. Even an RCP 8.5 scenario isn’t…

I agree with your broader point- one shouldn't tell others that their life isn't worth living. But I'm afraid maybe you're downplaying the struggles a poor Bangladeshi have to go through.

I currently live in Bangladesh. And my father made a off-handed comment few days ago about how there isn't many "thin" people in our village anymore. When he grew up in 60s, a big chunk of our village people didn't have two meals regularly, people dying of hunger wasn't so uncommon. Just two days ago a doctor friend told me hundreds of people die in his hospital every week due to lack of proper equipment. I have several times witnessed the heartbreaking scene in pharmacies where people ask for the price of a medicine, and then turn away without buying anything after hearing the price.

Overpopulation at least partly contributes to this, if not the biggest contributor. It may not be a global problem, but it definitely is a problem for a country like Bangladesh (and maybe India too). I'm not saying this people's life is worthless, but I would definitely not want a new generation of people to go through this.

Population control here is not just the pragmatic and necessary option, it's also the most humane thing to do.

Re: The Global Population Crisis That Never Was

#44

Post by [deleted] »

throwaway3699 wrote: post #36
jojobas wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One may be happy in a mud hut eating nothing but corn, but generally not after getting used to proper construction, sanitation, food etc. Recent history shows that there's no holding previously backwards countries from advancing their consumption. As Russians joke, the global famine will come when the Chinese start using forks. China, India and SE Asia are quickly upping their per-capita production and consumption of…

> We have no moral right to say "Nonono, you can't do what we did in the 20th century and live like us!". Yes, we do. Now that we know what the effects of climate change could be. That being said, we do have a moral duty to help out. Populations tend to grow slower when they become "more advanced", so it might not be the end of the world.

[deleted]

Re: The Global Population Crisis That Never Was

#45

Post by marcus_holmes »

h0l0cube wrote: post #18
marcus_holmes wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm always curious about this. Cambodia (for example) has a terrible rubbish problem. They burn their trash, and vast amounts of it get thrown in the Mekong river and washed out to sea. There's also a big problem with unlicensed forest logging, and all sorts of environmental concerns. This is, primarily, because poor people are too busy with immediate survival concerns to worry about their environment. Norway (for ex…

It's pretty well known that when you look at individual consumptions habits, which account for overseas production emissions, there's a clear correlation between income and greenhouse gas emissions. Though it has been shown that some countries are beginning to reduce emissions while increasing GDP. Much of that shift could be explained by a global shift to renewables as they become the cheapest form of power, but thi…

Yeah but emissions are only one part of the equation - logging a forest will produce more net atmospheric carbon than taking a long-haul plane trip, even though cutting down trees doesn't emit anything.

The biggest carbon sink is the ocean, so doing things that damage the ocean (like dumping trash into a river) are more of a concern.

There's also other environmental concerns than CO2 and climate change. Damaging jungle and ocean ecosystems creates other effects that we need to be concerned about (not least biodiversity losses from loss of habitat and population).

Re: The Global Population Crisis That Never Was

#46

Post by rayiner »

captain_price7 wrote: post #43
rayiner wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are way to many people on Earth than Earth can sustain in what we consider a life worth living This point of view comes up a lot in connection with climate change, and I always find it incredibly offensive. My dad was reminiscing the other day about his happy childhood growing up in a village in Bangladesh in the 1950s. This was back when 1 in 3 kids didn’t live to the age of 5. Even an RCP 8.5 scenario isn’t…

I agree with your broader point- one shouldn't tell others that their life isn't worth living. But I'm afraid maybe you're downplaying the struggles a poor Bangladeshi have to go through. I currently live in Bangladesh. And my father made a off-handed comment few days ago about how there isn't many "thin" people in our village anymore. When he grew up in 60s, a big chunk of our village people didn't have two meals re…

My dad works in public health, including in Bangladesh, I’m well aware of the issues. (That said, I think the anti-natalism of the international development field is under appreciated as a double-edged sword, as countries like South Korea and Singapore are beginning to find out.)

My point isn’t in disagreement with yours. Of course being poor is worse than being richer. My point is that even in Bangladesh, the level of prosperity is sufficient to exceed the threshold for humans to find life “worthwhile.”

Re: The Global Population Crisis That Never Was

#47

Post by tonyedgecombe »

liaukovv wrote: post #6
paganel wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bangladesh has some struggles. It is the most densely populated (large) country on earth. They have major floods often which cause big problems. But they manage to survive Countries like Denmark and Norway are a lot more detrimental to the planet's ecosystem because they consume a lot, lot more per capita compared to what Bangladesh does (and they consume lots of bad things that Bangladeshi people do not consume).

But if you look at this from country abstraction level, what does it matter how much they consume per capita? All that matters is absolute number

So countries like Luxembourg can continue to pollute because at an absolute level it doesn't matter but countries like India or China can't have any development because at an absolute level their emissions are huge. I can't see poorer countries accepting that argument.

Re: The Global Population Crisis That Never Was

#48

Post by 74B5 »

Poluation x Goods/Services x Energy/Resource demand x Waste production = Human impact on earth

It seems fairly common to picture the earth heading to an unstable overpopulation but imo this is only a comfortably narrowed down perspective on large scale problems. Especially for western countries, it is tempting to focus on the global population issue because this is primarily a phenomenon of rural, poor regions, so not their own. The other three mayor factors at play here would unfortunately require to rethink basic economics and this would reach deep down into societies. I suspect some sort of psychological "the others fault" self defense emerging in large. I have to be honest here, i fell for it too at first.

Even if the overpopulation would be the only factor we face, its solution would still be large scale and system questioning because either you throw away any moral standards or you end up creating and distributing wealth in a sustainable way. No, simply the delivery of contraception is no solutions only good healthcare and especially the education of girls/women.

Re: The Global Population Crisis That Never Was

#49

Post by throwaway210222 »

amriksohata wrote: post #4

The sheer ignorance of this statement: "The myth, as is commonly told, tells the story of a mid-twentieth century world headed for disaster. There were too many people being born and not enough food being produced. This combination of forces would lead inexorably to famine, unchecked migration, conflict and other calamities. However, thanks to the inventiveness of Western scientists more food was produced, Armageddon…

There aren't "western" or "eastern" or "southern" scientists.

There are just scientists.

And deal with that chip.

Re: The Global Population Crisis That Never Was

#50

Post by orwin »

simonh wrote: post #40
jcelerier wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This combination of forces would lead inexorably to famine, unchecked migration, conflict and other calamities. ... and.. it does ? https://www.worldvision.org/refugees-news-stories

The top 7 regions creating refugees are Syria, Venezuela, Afghanistan, South Sudan, Myanmar, Somalia or Democratic Republic of Congo. None of them do so due to overpopulation, or even environmental or ecological crisis. They're all political issues.

South-eastern Mediterranean situation was caused by repeating drought since 2006 collapsing their agricultural production. A drought in 2010 in Russia reduced their grain production by 30% and doubled the price of grain during the winter 2010-2011: it was basically a death sentence to already famished people in some African countries (Centrafrique, but also Sudan at the time), but what wasn't expected was the price of oil declining sharply, making Syria, Lybia, Tunisia and Egypt and Algeria less solvent. Algeria managed, but other countries less so. What do you think these countries have in common?
Post reply on HN