English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Right now, the population of the world is something like 6 billion people and continues to growth. What is the maximum number of people that can live on our planet?

2006-07-06 21:44:50 · 17 answers · asked by vanchan_london 3 in Social Science Other - Social Science

17 answers

A generally accepted -- if broad -- estimate which appeared in New Scientist a few years ago, showed that if everyone currently living in the world (about 6 billion) lived like a European we would need a total of three Earths (the resources including space three times the size of Earth's) for everyone to live sustainably.

And if everyone on Earth currently lived like a North American we would need five Earths. That's four additional planets if all 6 billion of us consumed the resources consumed by a mean average North American.

Now, that doesn't quite answer your question, because I'm saying how many Earths we need for the current population, rather than how big a population the Earth can support. However -- as my answer shows -- the question needs contextualization as to how that population is living, how their economies function, what technology they use, even what food they eat is a major factor in determining the "ecological footprint" of a population.

So the bottom line is, the more altruistic and forward-thinking we are, the more human beings we can share the world with. The more selfish and resource-hogging we are, the fewer.

2006-07-06 22:26:52 · answer #1 · answered by exiguusnemesis 2 · 4 0

Support means place, energy and food to everybody.
Due human creativity, we do not have limit.
We have nuclear power to provide a lot of energy, underground to build more houses and bacterias, insects and worms to produce food.

There is maximum, but we cannot tell by now. Human race always improve its methods to support our society. There are many variables and mostly are not mapped yet. We cannot say how many people can live here.

Life changes. In europe I cannot afford a house within a big city with more than 60m² but in Brazil, easily I can do it (minimum of 200m²). This is our reality now and 400 years ago were completely different. We just adapt our exigences according to our limitations.

True is of course, all life and environment will suffer while Homo Sapiens still with its reproduction cruzade.

2006-07-06 22:09:06 · answer #2 · answered by carlos_frohlich 5 · 0 0

i do not undergo in options the position I examine it, yet I belive it replaced right into a nationwide Geographic lower back contained in the previous due Eighteen Nineties, yet there replaced right into a study out that suggested that if the land were managed genuine, the earth might want to help between 20 and 25 billion human beings comfortably. i'm not particular how precise it truly is, yet when it really is genuine, it really is not the inhabitants it truly is causing the topics, merely the persons who're handling the elements (Governments and huge organization).

2016-11-06 00:49:41 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

If our current rate of human expansion continues, matched with advances in technology, economists estimate the earth would peak out at around 8 BILLION INHABITANTS. When this would happen, not sure. But earth couldn't handle more.

2006-07-09 09:49:30 · answer #4 · answered by TK 3 · 0 0

Come on!!! We are all regular people in here,do you really expect anyone to know such a thing,you need to find a university Dr. or something and then also he wont be 100 % sure too.

2006-07-06 22:07:12 · answer #5 · answered by AB 4 3 · 0 0

depends on your lifestyle ... if we all live like the americans probably 10%, if we all live like the africans then we can support the entire population ... it is a finite resource and the only one we have.

2006-07-06 21:51:00 · answer #6 · answered by richie_b 2 · 0 0

Like people of which country?

2006-07-07 01:59:15 · answer #7 · answered by ? 5 · 0 0

Apparently we could have five times as much food if we stopped rearing livestock and just grew vegetables ...no more burgers

2006-07-07 11:06:47 · answer #8 · answered by Simon K 3 · 0 0

42. The answer is always 42.

2006-07-06 22:15:57 · answer #9 · answered by Away With The Fairies 7 · 0 0

Comfortably, it would have to be less than is currently here...

A culling of the herd is required... :D

2006-07-06 21:49:16 · answer #10 · answered by Forlorn Hope 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers