'Jaw-dropping' world fertility rate crash expected

[ProVobis]

Fertility rate: 'Jaw-dropping' global crash in children being born

“Falling fertility rates mean nearly every country could have shrinking populations by the end of the century.

And 23 nations - including Spain and Japan - are expected to see their populations halve by 2100.

Countries will also age dramatically, with as many people turning 80 as there are being born…”

 

[Irishmom2]

Hmmm. And some people are expecting an uptick in populationdue to Covid forcing people to stay home.
With nothing to do.

 

[Pattylt]

I admit I haven’t read the article but I am assuming by fertility rate they are talking about lower numbers of births, not that people are becoming less fertile? While lower birth rates will place a financial burden on that generation, it should also lead to higher wages and competition for jobs…

I’m too old to probably see the fallout from this and I imagine the benefits/burdens will be a mixed bag.

 

[ATraveller]

The overpopulation claims have been overblown. The evidence was clear years ago this was happening. But even back then the drop wasn’t supposed to be this bad in some countries.
Anytime someone brings up NFP or wanting large families on CAF, you get the obligatory posts about overpopulation and shaming those who want large families because “overpopulation”. The reality is very few Catholics want large families in the first place. Then add in wider society and you see that a very small minority wanting a large family has no effect on global population.

To demonstrate how badly the overpopulation people got it wrong: the Lancet article cited by the BBC suggests the peak will be about 9 billion around 2050 and drop to 8 billion by 2100. The UN* not too recently projected 10 billion by 2100, the peak year rather than ~2050.
*World population growth is expected to nearly stop by 2100 | Pew Research Center

 

[Hume]

“Falling fertility rates mean nearly every country could have shrinking populations by the end of the century.

And 23 nations - including Spain and Japan - are expected to see their populations halve by 2100.

Countries will also age dramatically, with as many people turning 80 as there are being born…”

Sounds like it’s a minor dose of precisely what this world needs.

The growth in population coupled with the growth of consumerism as the idealized mode of living has wreaked absolute hell on this planet in the last 50 years.

The extinction-event disappearance rate of other species and the shifts in global temperature and weather patterns are largely the fruits of humanity.

 

[Hume]

Gentle reminder;

The entirety of human history until two centuries ago occurred -

1. with fewer than a billion people on the planet at any time.
2. before the rise of radical western consumerism.

 

[ATraveller]

Gentle reminder;

The entirety of human history until two centuries ago occurred -

1. with fewer than a billion people on the planet at any time .
2. before the rise of radical western consumerism.

Your point? The carrying capacity of the Earth is 15 billion (or 47 billion if we really wanted to just meet our basic needs). We’re not even going to reach 10 billion before it starts dropping to 8 billion in 80 years from now.

 

[Hume]

Your point? The carrying capacity of the Earth is 15 billion (or 47 billion if we really wanted to just meet our basic needs). We’re not even going to reach 11 billion.

The carrying capacity of the earth is and always has been the current population. Capacity grows with growth in food and medical tech.

One of these days the oil driving all this will run out. We’ll eventually have to crash back to renewable resources of energy like we used when all we could sustain at one time was under 1 billion.

Luckily, as a man pushing 40 I’m not going to live to see it.

 

[ATraveller]

The carrying capacity of the earth is and always has been the current population. Capacity grows with growth in food and medical tech.

We know innovation, especially in Europe, have shown things will be sustainable. Increased efficiency and better urban planning.
You were saying?

 

[Hume]

We know innovation, especially in Europe, have shown things will be sustainable. Increased efficiency and better urban planning.
You were saying?

Oil creates the fertilizer, oil trucks/ships the food in to major centers. Oil produces the plastics our medical industries can’t do without.

When we fall back to renewable resources because the non-renewables are beyond the means of your average person, the carrying capacity of the earth will fall. It’s not up for debate, really.

The plague-carts will roll once again. “Bring out yer dead!”

 

[ATraveller]

Oil creates the fertilizer, oil trucks/ships the food in to major centers. Oil produces the plastics out medical industries can’t do without.

I’m well aware of that since my background is in chemistry. First, we have the technology to take plastics, including “non-recyclable” ones, and turn them back into crude oil. So extracting from natural reserves will be diminished through this. There are also plant-based plastics that are becoming more popular.
And in “socialist” Denmark:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-denmark-windpower/denmark-sources-record-47-of-power-from-wind-in-2019-idUSKBN1Z10KE

 

[Hume]

First, we have the technology to take plastics, including “non-recyclable” ones, and turn them back into crude oil.

Fluff. Pure fluff.

The point of non-renewables is that they radically leverage energy. As an illustative example, we use roughly 13,000 btus of energy to produce a gallon of gas that yields 130,000 btus. A factor of ten.

The energy consumed to collect your plastic and process it back into crude then process it into gasoline would likely yield very very very little excess energy when you account for the whole process.

What this means is that as a planet we’ll have to work harder for our energy, have less to spare. This, in turn, supports a lower population.

 

[ATraveller]

The energy consumed to collect your plastic and process it back into crude then process it into gasoline wouldn’t likely yield very very very little excess energy when you account for the whole process.

show your work.

 

[Hume]

And in “socialist” Denmark:

How many nations have the population density of Denmark? Moreover, at 5 million people, Denmark is as populous as greater LA.

And keep in mind, your article just describes grid power.

Grid power isn’t great at shipping over distances. We use petrol for that.

 

[ATraveller]

How many nations have the population density of Denmark? Moreover, at 5 million people, Denmark is as populous as greater LA.

And keep in mind, your article just describes grid power.

Grid power isn’t great at shipping over distances. We use petrol for that.

Clean electricity overtaking fossil fuels in Britain

Electric cars?

Now supplement that with solar and geothermal.

“A full decarbonization of the electricity system by 2050 is possible for lower system cost than today based on available technology,” said Christian Breyer, who heads a team of international researchers at Lappeenranta University of Technology (LUT) in Finland.

"Energy transition is no longer a question of technical feasibility or economic viability, but of political will

Due to rapidly falling costs, solar photovoltaic (solar PV) and battery storage are the main drivers of securing the global energy supply. Solar PV’s share of total power supply is expected to rise from 37% in 2030 to almost 70% by 2050, the study said.

https://www.dw.com/en/can-we-live-in-a-world-without-fossil-fuels/a-41318600

 

[Hume]

Electric cars?

How are you going to make this stuff?

The petrol (1:10 power leverage) that drives virtually all this production is an ultra-rare commodity.
It will be much harder and more expensive to ship the metal to make them. The plastics you need to keep the electric car light aren’t affordable anymore.

Would an electric car even work when it’s completely made of metal and renewables?

The entire economy as you know it, top to bottom will change.

And it will support fewer people by virtue of its lesser ability to produce spare energy.

 

[ATraveller]

How are you going to make this stuff?

How are they making them now?

Would an electric car even work when it’s completely made of metal and renewables?

I wonder how the Norwegians are getting along with their aim of replacing all non-electric vehicles in about a decade or two. It’s working well with them.

And it will support fewer people by virtue of its lesser ability to produce spare energy.

Not according to the latest innovation.

 

[Hume]

How are they making them now?

In an global process driven by fossil fuels with ample use of plastics (an oil product) and aluminum (produced with electrolysis). If they’re still made in a world without fossil fuel…

I wonder how the Norwegians are getting along with their aim of replacing all non-electric vehicles in about a decade or two. It’s working well with them.

Another nation with a population of greater LA…

That is intimately dependent on the shipping industry which is (you guessed it) driven by oil.

Not according to the latest innovation.

You’re not understanding. I don’t think you want to.

It’s a question of energy in vs. energy out.

Renewables cannot compete with non-renewables. The current boom in population and consumption exists almost solely because of non-renewable energy.

And it’s going to run out eventually.

 

[ATraveller]

In an global process driven by fossil fuels with ample use of plastics (an oil product) and aluminum (produced with electrolysis). If they’re still made in a world without fossil fuel…

We’ve just gone through oil/plastics/etc. and power. Once you move towards renewables, you use those in the future.

That is intimately dependent on the shipping industry which is (you guessed it) driven by oil.

Yeah, It’s as if there’s no R&D to adjust things.

Renewables cannot compete with non-renewables.

Did you bother reading the links I posted? I get the feeling you haven’t.

 

[Hume]

We’ve just gone through oil/plastics/etc. and power. Once you move towards renewables, you use those in the future.

With lower efficiency, of course. Which is the problem.
Keep in mind that when you build the 10-15 year wind turbine or the 25 year solar panel after the collapse of fossil fuel, you’re going to mine the ore and refine it (or recycle other metals) and then manufacture the product itself and then ship and set up the product also without the aid of fossil fuel.

We’ll still do it, I’m sure. But each incremental step will cost more and be less efficient to accomplish.

The trucks and heavy equipment you’d propose as being out there doing the work will run on batteries. Gas requires a (converted from btus to kWh) 4kWhs to produce with an average work yield of 8kWh. We started with 4kWhs and got 8kWhs of work with gas.

That electrical truck required 10kWhs at a conventional plant to produce a similar (name removed by moderator)ut of 4kWhs from the charging station and the electric motor may produce as much as 3kWhs with it. So we started with 10 kWh of energy and turned 3 into actual work.

And don’t forget, wind turbines don’t work when the wind doesn’t blow and are fundamentally hampered by a theoretical maximum energy yield that isn’t very high in addition to generally lower lifespans than we initially hoped.

Solar panels don’t work when the sun isn’t out and degrade a bit every year.

See the problem? You can’t “out-innovate” the difference between a product with an energy yield greater than what it took to produce it and another product that can yield at theoretical best just 100%.

The result is less spare energy, thus lower carrying capacity for population.