As of 15.11.2024 at 0:10 Finnish time, the total number of people in the world was 8,188,237,968. By the time you finish reading this text, the number will have increased by thousands. The world population is growing by 71 million per year, or a growth rate of 0.87%. There were about a million people in the Stone Age. In 1800, the world population exceeded a billion. In the 2030s, the global population will already be 9 billion. It is likely to grow to 10 billion by the end of the century. It will start to decline from there; perhaps even before the end of the century.
These figures seem alarming at first. The finite Earth simply cannot accommodate too many people. As the Club of Rome stated in the 1960s: growth has limits and the limits are coming soon (in the next few decades). A large human population combined with a large personal ecological footprint and carbon footprint is not a possible burden for the Earth. Otherwise, natural resources will run out and ecosystems and the climate will be destroyed. Often, people are scared by population growth.
However, there is good news: the global population has started to decline, except for Africa and a few Asian countries. There is no population bomb coming. In many countries, especially in Europe (including Finland), the number of children is already around 1-1.5. In order for the population to grow, the number of children should be over 2.1 per woman giving birth. The global population curve grew rapidly, especially in the 20th century, and the world’s population almost tripled. The reason was increased energy and food production and improved health. Just like in nature, when a plant or animal population has a lot of extra food and energy, it grows. The biggest single reason that made accelerating population growth possible was fossil fuels, especially oil. The accelerating use of oil raised the world’s population growth too high. Oil, for example, enabled the Green Revolution in agriculture and the tripling of yields and enormous economic growth that sustained a large human population.
Global population growth peaked at 2.1% in the 1960s. It has since decreased by less than half. In nature, population growth generally follows an S-curve. This means that the population does not grow at first, but when it receives new resources, it grows rapidly until, as resources decrease, population growth slows down, and eventually it begins to shrink. Population growth would be a problem if it did not stop, but all the data from around the world shows that the population is starting to decline. In addition to the decline in resources (few people have their own farms these days), the main reasons for this are, in particular, contraceptives, contraceptive education, improved social security (so that children are not acquired as a workforce and as security for old age), urban lifestyles, and most importantly, the education of girls and women. Educated women understand that having too many children can be a disadvantage and a burden for them. All of these still need to be promoted globally.
So we no longer need to worry about population growth, because it is turning into population decline. Otherwise, yes, if the population would just grow. Population growth is often feared and many see it as the root cause of environmental problems. However, this is not true. Too many people are not the root cause of the problems, but too much consumption and the way we live. The problem is too large an ecological footprint and carbon footprint. Too much meat consumption and too much use of fossil fuels and natural resources, such as deforestation and mining. Environmental problems are caused by taking too much from nature, messing up nature’s natural cycles and dumping waste and toxins and other substances that do not belong there, such as extra phosphorus and carbon. The main cause of biodiversity loss is land use and the lack of protected areas (mines, agriculture, etc.). Too small a part of the Earth’s surface, land and seas, is outside protection. A Gambian consumes about 100 times less than an American, and the carbon emissions of an American are 60 times higher. This is the heart of the problem. A wasteful lifestyle would require dozens of Earths, while a sustainable lifestyle would only require one. The problem will not be solved by establishing colonies on Mars.
There would be enough food for over 10 billion people if food were grown organically and people reduced their meat consumption and switched to a diet rich in plant protein. The impact of meat consumption on climate change is about 25-30% and is thus one of the largest single factors negatively affecting the climate. Proteins are vital and people produce meat in agriculture precisely because of protein. However, protein is very well obtained from soy, lentils, beans, peas, rice, grains and seeds. Soy provides even more protein (up to 50g protein in 100g of soy) than meat, and meat is rich in unhealthy and bad fat, the consumption of which shortens life. The world’s longest-living people are Adventist Christians living in California (Loma Linda), who are mostly vegan, and people living in Japan, especially Okinawa, who are also mostly vegan. These people generally live to be over 100 years old.
In addition to food, a change to completely renewable energy and electric transport, as well as a general reduction in consumption, is necessary. There is a Finnish saying: ”Concord gives way.” An equal and democratic world, where people live in harmony with nature, enables a large human population to live on Earth.
Daniel Elkama
https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/soybeans#_noHeaderPrefixedContent
https://www.bluezones.com/explorations/loma-linda-california/
Ecoblogi - A Blog by Daniel Elkama 
Jätä kommentti