Anissimov, Michael. "Overpopulation? Not a
Problem!" ]Accelerating Future
Transhumanism, AI, Nanotechnology, the Singularity, and Extinction Risk. Web. 21 Mar. 2012.
Many scientists believe that out climbing population of
seven billion is threatening our stability as a species because the Earth’s
carrying capacity is unknown. According to the article “Overpopulation? Not a
Problem!” the Earth is nowhere near carrying capacity. They have found creative
and unique ways to maximize the space on Earth. The United States has
10,000,000 km squared of land and the Earth has total area, including water, of
500,000,000 km squared. Population
density by region varies, and that is why they say that in order to get the
most out of what we have, we have to place people in the most beneficial
places.
 |
| This shows the population density in each country |
 |
| This shows how condensed the world population could get and how much room we have to grow. |
Just looking at the United States alone, if 5% was
converted to an urban area, 45% was made suburban, and the other half of the
United States was left rural, the population of the U.S.A alone could hold 12
billion people. If this method was spread to every country the world population
could easily reach 100 billion. To reach the goal of 100 billion, we would have
to overcome the main obstacles of colonizing deserts, living in highlands and
mountains, providing energy and food, and disposing of waste.
In
the deserts, air conditioning, heating and water sources would be the biggest
challenges. The article proposed, using solar-powered airships to hold giant
shades to keep temperature low during the day, also at night heaters
underground would provide sufficient heat for living. Water in the desert can
be found by drilling deep into the water table or using plants that are able to
produce water.
To
live in the highlands and mountain tops we would get around by personal flying
machines, which should be affordable in the mid 10’s . High altitudes would also
be survivable with the injection of artificial red blood cells that store enough
oxygen for us to live off of.
Finding
energy for 100 billion people would be costly and would need the newest
technology. Nuclear fusion and Helium-3 are possible sources, but little
research has been done and we will have answers soon.
To
provide food to the whole population we would have to use all of the fertile
land. Vertical farming is an efficient way to grow lots of food using little
space. If we build oceanic cities to manufacture seafood and algae into
different forms, then the seafood industry would boom, there is another place
for people to live, and there would be plenty of food.
Getting
rid of all the waste the humans would produce would be taken care of by specially
engineered bacteria that can break down anything organic. For things like
plastic we would incinerate them in giant sealed autoclaves. Chemists would
oversee the removal of waste of a regular basis.
Opinion: I personally
think that this plan would be amazing if it could work out, but it sounds a
little far-fetched. I don’t know if we could live underwater or in deserts, but
if we could then, yes, the carrying capacity would increase. I like that this
scientist isn’t limiting the population and thinking efficiently.
Questions: 1. Do you
think that these ideas are realistic? If no, explain how you would change them.
If yes, explain.
2. How would these
changes affect how we live now?
3. Not using any of
these changes, how would you change the way we live to reach such a high
carrying capacity?
Great article Emily! This would be so amazing if it could actually work! I agree that it would be hard for us to live in deserts but I have heard of underwater hotels, http://www.poseidonresorts.com/poseidon_main.html, which I can only imagine is fairly expensive, but I'm sure if we can have the technology and logic to build underwater hotel rooms, sometime in the near future we will have houses. But if we could live and survive successfully in the desert, I believe the carrying capacity would increase.
ReplyDelete3. As I said above, an underwater hotel will ultimately lead to underwater homes. Another way to reach a higher carrying capacity could be houses...afloat. I know there are a few (http://www.floatinghomes.com/floatinghomes.htm#location) but if more people heard and knew about them, I’m sure we could have many more, thus increasing our carrying capacity. Also maybe like homes in/under the ground. This would allow more homes without taking up land. The only thing I can think of that is like this or been somewhat created is in the movie “Lord of The Rings”, some of the people have their homes built into the hills. If we could do more of any of these options, I believe we could very much improve our caring capacity.
This was a very interesting and different article and i enjoyed it. There were just very different ideas that i haven't heard before. They all sound really cool but a bit unrealistic. At least they are thinking and trying to find solutions to the population problem. If the population does keep growing at a fast rate we will have to find ways to live more efficiently.
ReplyDeleteQuestion 1: Although these ideas do sound really cool they do not sound realistic. It would have a very high cost and looking at the economy right now i don't see how that would work out. Also i don't think many people would want to live underwater. To change these ideas maybe they could have more people in one area. They could have people live in areas that are not being used. When those stop working then there probably should not be that many people.
I found this article to be extremely interesting. This person took a whole new perspective on the growing problem of population expansion. Instead of looking at ways to prevent population growth this author looked at what to do after it grows too big. I think that this is great because honestly there is not too much we can do to change the way our population grows while still being ethical. I agree with Emily on the fact that although these are all amazing ideas, a lot of these plans are unrealistic at this time. I hope that by the time that we need to worry about having enough room for people that we can have the technology to do a lot of the things mentioned in this article. I think this was an amazing article and I found it to be very interesting, and different from what most people usually write about.
ReplyDeleteQuestion 1: Although these are great ideas I do feel these are a bit unrealistic, as stated earlier. I think the idea of living underwater is not something we could do without extreme technological advances and most likely the ecosystems would be drastically altered in the areas where we places our habitats. I think that we should use the land in Antarctica and places like that don’t really have things living there. I like the idea of using the deserts where nothing really lives as well. If we could bring in the necessary supplies it could defiantly work. I really liked the idea of the waste disposal although; again a lot of technological advancements would need to take place. I feel that these ideas are unrealistic with today’s knowledge and skills but with more discoveries and more desperation these plans could work and give aid to the population crisis that scientis are desperately trying to figure out.
I really enjoyed this article summary. It was a lot different from what we talked about in class, when learning about the world population. I was a little unsure of how we could help the environment while also increasing the population, but I now know how. In my opinion, this plan could work but it would take a lot of time and effort that many people are not willing to spare.
ReplyDeleteIn response to question 1, I do not think that this plan is very realistic. Like I said before, people would need to be willing to spend a lot of time and money on this plan. This would be very hard to do, considering the economy now. It would also be hard to get the message of this plan through to other people all around the world. Therefore, if this plan ever did take place, it would not be for a long time.