The Entire World Population Can Fit Into Alaska!?

Question

And everyone would still have a 16th of an acre to themselves
do the math. Me and my husband did-Incredible! Apparently
the world population can also fit into texas but no one would
have any land. Thats suprising because with all this overpopulation
talk, i really though there would have to be a way larger
land mass to fit all the people in it.

I am not suggesting we all move to Alaska but, I am
amazed that everyone could fit with house and land.
The world really isnt as overpopulated as we think!

Thoughts anyone?

If anyone doesnt believe me, just do the math
yourself.

I mean do you realize the implications?
The entire rest of the world would be
empty!

Answer 1

overpopulation refers more to the ability of the land to support the people living on it, not necessarily that they have land to plop a house down there.

It takes a lot of land to feed one family for a year. a LOT of land... more so in areas that are not tropical. Overpopulation IS occuring in africa and may be WORSE than we think, because so little of the land is open for legitimate agricultural use... its either too rocky, or doesnt have enough nutrients, or doesnt have enough rain to grow anything sufficient. So although there is PLENTY of open space in africa that will never have people living on it, it still cant support the people that are already there with the current agricultural tech.

No matter where you cram the people using it, you still need the land to grow the food (be it vegetative or animal)... and that would remain constant. Not over time, but say, right now. If we moved everyone to alaska, the same percentage of earth would be used for agriculture and so on. youre just reorganizing where people are, that doesnt necessarily change how much can be grown.

Interesting find though... i never realized how big alaska was!

EDIT: as a final note... we could have everyone live in one spot and use the rest of the world as a giant farm... but seeing how difficult it is for either the jews or the muslims to give up one city in the West Bank, can you imagine the outrage of entire civilizations giving up their homes? Its a shame our humanity gets in the way of our best interests!

Answer 2

I found it amusing that once we bought our 13 acres in Alaska, we could have invited the whole state's population over. If you figure that at a really wild party, you might be able to squeeze people in one per square foot.

I calc about 3000 square feet per person for the world's population in Alaska. A 40 x 75 foot lot. That's buildable. And a vasrtly lower density than in Manhatten or SIngapore.

But a fair bit of the state is 1) wet lands, 2) above the arctic circle, 3) underlain by permafrost, 4) on the side of the mountain, 5) in a lake, or all of the above. And all those people need roads, stores, workplaces, food supply, etc.

Our short growing season and the low angle of the sun preclude most types of crops and greatly reduce the number of calories that can be harvested from each acre. 98% of the food would have to be imported.

The world isn't overpopulated in terms of space. I have driven 100 to 300 miles between buildings of any kind in several countries around the world. And that's on the road system! Just off the roads, is less crowded.

But a lot of the world's population can't feed or house or advance themselves where they are nor where they can manage/afford to travel to.

Answer 3

This is true.

Overpopulation is a myth. The real problem is that people in some areas only have the means to support a very small population. Food transportation issues, political problems, and poverty are what causes people to starve to death.

Every country that has become highly industrialized has lowered it's birth rate dramatically. The native born population in the USA is less than the death rate. Which means that if it wasn't for immigration, the population in the USA would be dropping.

Farming practices can be greatly improved in many areas of the world. Technology also helps people to live in places that are not suitable for live. There are some problems with a large populations in a very concentrated areas, but there is also a TON of land that is completely undeveloped. I don't think it's a stretch for the world to support twice the population that it has now, and by that time, I believe that technology would allow another 6 billion people.

Answer 4

Land is not the issue. Your do the math argument does not consider sustainable living, just land per person. Great, I have land, but no food.
What crops would your family of four grow on your four sixteenths of an acre in Alaska to eat?
Consumption is the issue, not land. If the entire world used resources like the USA, we would need five worlds of resources to support our existance. Although we could fit many more that six billion people on this earth, what would their life be like? Certainly not driving to the supermarket to get food to eat.
Your husband knows how to divide on his calculator, not provide food for you two.

Answer 5

Land is just one of the resources you need to support the growing population. It's not the quantity of land itself but the quality matters as well. Can we grow enough food? What about the resources for shelter? Other needs such as medical needs, education must be satisfied for a population to live with stability. If whole world population were to move in Alaska, we would have diseases spreading; lack of food, shelter and unfulfillment of psychological needs would eventually lead to "dooms day." Just think about all the CO2 that would be produced in a relatively small area. Since there would not be any space left for trees, getting enough O2 will be one of be biggest problems. Being optimistic is great but being realistic is probably more important!

Answer 6

You left out all the infrastructure that goes along with a densely populated area. Yes, everyone could have an average of 2,700 sq. ft. to themselves, but do you plan on having any space left over for roads, supermarkets, post offices, Starbucks (personally, I can't live without Starbucks--don't know about you), a DMV office......etc.

The world is overpopulated in the sense that resources are being consumed faster than resources can be replaced or made.

Answer 7

That's interesting. But it's impossible because the diversity of land, culture ,economyetc. sustain this world. You just can't pack everything at one place. Interdependece is the key to survival and for that matter geographical separation is essential. You just can't mix oil and water

Answer 8

Well, I don't want to be given the side of a mountain or a mosquito infested pond or a glacier, please! Technically, perhaps all could be packed into the area, but it is not all habitable and it certainly couldn't sustain them all.

Answer 9

29.2% of the earth's surface is land (land: 148.94 million sq km
), and of that 13% is ariable.

(as a side note, ~6% of the land on earth is the USA.)

Answer 10

If u squeeze tightly together I bet you'd all fit in AK