I don't think the Earth can handle it.
In order to grow a crop of corn, you must have the land area, water, seeds, and fertilizer available.
The more people, the less land and water.
I don't have an answer for "population control". People's basic instinct is to procreate. We can't take that right away from anyone.
2006-12-11 03:35:06
·
answer #1
·
answered by rouschkateer 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The world's population is still growing at doubling rate of about 35 years. This rate is far too high. Some nations are growing faster than others but the problem is that the ones that cannot sustain themselves with enough resources (i.e. food, fertile land, etc.) are the ones that have the fastest growth rate. parts of the world such as the tropics and much of Africa just do not have the proper conditions to grow enough crops for self sustainment. however, they are the ones having the most children.
If you live in the U.S. however, you are in luck. Between us and Canada, we have the best soils (known as mollisols) on the planet and the most of it. we have not even begun to reach our maximum production capabilities. But even that has limitations!
2006-12-11 06:27:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by Adam S 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Eventhough the population is growing there is enough food in this world to give everyone a balanced diet (i.e. feed them)! At present nitrogen fertilizers, new natural pesticide and other technologies can increase crop yields by two or three more times. I guess that there are ways in which we can keep on surviving and support more people, though the real problem is the distribution of food than the lack of it!!
2006-12-11 04:37:55
·
answer #3
·
answered by fm 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I will not even attempt to answer this question in a comprehensive way, but what I have been thinkin of is that our current food production is fast using up many other sorts of resources, that will probably become scarce in the future.
The first of these is of course fertile land. It is difficult to keep land highly fertile forever by additives, this is already evident in Europe where areas have been farmed constantly for very long times now. Also urban development is taking up land in some areas of high population density (Japan is an example).
Second comes fossil-based energy, that is, petroleum and electricity created from fossil fuels. Modern agriculture uses a lot of machinery, which uses fuel, and a lot of industrial fertilizers, which are made in energy-intensive processes. Then on top of this comes processing and transportation of food. If we are going to see a fossil energy crisis, it could also have a serious effect on our agricultural efficiency.
If the western world will go into a food crisis, I guess more people will need to eat less meat, as to get one pound of beef from a cow, you need to feed it several pounds of plant-based food.
2006-12-11 03:37:22
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Just because a country has no technology it doesn't mean it is third world. South Africa is only third world cause the majority of the population is below the middle class and cause of the low education level to the majority. Yet if you visit South Africa you wouldn't believe it was a third world country (depends where you go). India also, they third world but supply a lot of agricultural to the world. Only countries like Somalia and Zimbabwe have nothing, they rely on aid from other countries to save their butts.
2016-05-23 05:23:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The world can only support maximize number of humans, including other organisms. Once we reach the K-carrying capacity (logistic growth model--K-carrying capacity is the maxinmum number of individuals that environment can support), we will level off, or start to crack down. This is because we don't have enough energy and resources to support our population to increase indefinitely. Not with other species either.
2006-12-11 04:02:16
·
answer #6
·
answered by Dr. Zoo 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
see Club of Rome "Limits to Growth", environmental or carbon footprint.
clearly on a finite planet we can't have infinite growth in consumption. And wars and unfair trading/power systems only exacerbate the problems
The sustainable carrying capacity of humans at a "reasonable" standard of living and civilisation is probably 3bn.
2006-12-11 04:02:38
·
answer #7
·
answered by fred 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
yes there is enough food for everyone considering that tonnes of food are destroyed each year so that the market prices don't go down ... yes there is definetly enough food for everyone only humans dont distribute it rightly
2006-12-11 04:10:57
·
answer #8
·
answered by happy go lucky gurl 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, we have never ran out of anything on this planet. At times there are distribution problems but those are usually because of war.
2006-12-11 03:35:21
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
We can't its as simple as that
Even now theres people starving and others just wanting more and more with no concern for others and their needs just their own wants
2006-12-11 04:46:22
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋