can the earth keep up with human consumption?

Answer 1

Yes, the Earth has plenty of resources. We are also coming up with more efficient and technolgical ways to use the Earth's resources. We are supposedly running out of wild fish due to overfishing and our past fish farms were very harmful to the waters where they were situated. We now have advanced farms that can be anchored in deep waters and produce almost no waste. So, even if we were running out of fish, man found a way to use Earth's resources to produce more fish and now in a safer manner.

Answer 2

The question cannot be answered the way it is currently stated. The reason why is that we can certainly keep up with it for the next 5 years. What will happen in 100 years? 300? 500? We don't know yet. Therefore, either an outcome or a timespan must be defined.

The other consideration is that the answers so far reflect a 'black and white' mindset, but the answer is not simply 'yes' or a 'no' even with respect to a defined time span.

The reason for this is, that if the population grows to a certain point, say for example 50-100 billion (Don't get caught up in that number. It's just an example), our ability to sustain that population will be strained with respect to producing food and other things needed to survive. Those things could be all kinds of stuff from fresh water, electricity, or drugs and medicines. When those limits are strained to a certain point, people will actually start to die. It could be argued that this is happening now, but the reality is, that the starvation which occurs in the world today is not a matter of world resources, as much as a problem with food distribution, politics, and leaders such as Saddam Hussein used to be, and Fidel Castro still is, kind of.

Presuming there is not a cataclysmic event such as a nuclear war, the current growth trend will continue up to a point in time when adequate resources are not available to support that growth. At that time, the population of the earth and the world resources required and available would reach an equilibrium for a long time. It could be said at that point, that the Earth is 'keeping up'. How would the quality of life be at that point? It would definitely poor for those people living in conditions where the 'rubber meets the road' with respect to resources and their economic position. For there to be equibrium, the number of deaths would have to be similar to the number of births. The birth rate would in all likelihood be very high if the population is very high. Therefore, the death rate would also be high. The only reason for the death rate to climb and for an equilibrium to be forced would be, as I mentioned before, that the earth's resources are being strained to the limit. Therefore, what you would have is massive famine and worldwide starvation. This would lead to widespread disease due to the weakened population. This would lead to a decreased birth rate. A decreased birthrate would result in a declining population, and less resources needed to support them. This would lead to a recovery phase of the earth's ability to regenerate fresh water, food, fuel, and other resources. This would lead to increased births, and the cycle would continue unless a more significant destabilizing influence occurs. An example of this would be the black plague (bubonic) in Europe in the middle ages.

In any closed system, the system will readjust to meet equilibrium. It will do this indefinitely. Whether or not we end up nuking each other is not part of this question. Another consideration would be that in any population/culture, there will be some stratification of the 'haves' and 'have-nots', but this is beyond the scope of the question.

The bottom line is this: The earth is a closed system floating in space surrounded by millions of miles of vacuum. Because both physical and biological closed systems will always gravitate towards equilibrium, the earth can and will keep up with human consumption, because human consumption is also a variable and the two will eventually balance each other out.

Therefore, the question should not be 'can the earth keep up with human consumption', it should be 'can human consumption be modified to meet the resources available from the earth? and if not, what form will the path towards equilibrium take? Unless we can form a united front in controlling the world population, any increase in resources will simply be matched by an increase in the population. The population of the earth must be managed downward through natural causes over the course of many decades, and sustained at a level that is harmonius with the earth's ability to regenerate. Otherwise, this path towards equilibrium will not be pleasant and nature will take its course for us.

Answer 3

Malthusian economics is a horrible conventional wisdom. Human consumption has never been a problem for food or energy. Food has always been in abundant supply and in fact is so over-produced that it needs to be subsidized. The problem with food has been, and probably always will be, distribution. The energy crises over the last 1,000 years have never lasted long. Humans have a unique ability to find alternate forms of energy. Right now nuclear energy is viable if oil stops being available and solar energy is soon to be cost efficient. If I was going to worry about anything it would be whether the Earth can keep up human pollution. This issue is far more complicated. Human pollution includes carcinogens, water contamination, deforestation, and global warming. All of these could ruin the Earth and kill humans and animals a lot faster than a simple lack of resources.

Answer 4

Well, you have one very lengthy answer down there, so I wont rattle on forever, just add my two cents. The earth will keep up with some human consumtion, but human population will level off to point the earth can support. Death through famine and plague will become more and more common. Within the next 15 years or so there will be a major nuclear exchange, that will take out hundreds of millions of people, and the environment will recover faster than the human population in that case.

Answer 5

Like most global problems, there is no single solution. We need to adopt a series of solutions. Starvation and drought are very unpleasant things. Uncontrolled population growth combined with decreased land availability and a deteriorating climate will make things increasingly difficult for human civilization.
If large numbers of people would adopt rather than having children of their own and free contraception was made widely available across the planet, that would help one part of the problem. We would decrease demand. Compulsory sterilization is something that most people (especially Americans) would find distasteful.
Solving the climate crisis would make more parts of the world hospitable to agriculture again. Also, reserving vast amounts of land for agriculture rather than buildings and parking lots would decrease pressure to find farmland.
Of course higher crop yields are another component to solving this problem.
So, to answer your question, the Earth can keep up with human consumption provided that we actively take steps to help it support us.

Answer 6

If resources are consumed thoughtfully, the Earth can provide. For instance, a very important thing which could make a huge difference, is if cooking could be done with waste-generated methane rather than fire wood. The amount of forest lost every year to fire wood is never mentioned, but it was the cause of the loss of much of the world's ancient forest. Just the kindling materials alone mean a loss of vegetative cover for the soil.

Most people in the world don't have running water or indoor plumbing. They don't have electricity or gas. They have raw sewage in the streets where it causes disease and pollutes local sources of drinking water.

Answer 7

Yes. Earth will recycle itself every thousands of years. It's all creation and destruction. No race will survive for ever. We will evolve and re-evolve. meteor collisions, major solar flares, ice ages, super volcanoes, super tsunamis, extreme earthquakes, strange viruses, etc., etc., will periodically control the population or completely recreate everything from scratch. The periodic cleansing will keep things under control including theover consumption.

Answer 8

The answer is pending. I believe we will have to "make up" for all of this damage we are doing, by eliminating electricity and technology. But the "others", (people who are absorbed in modern life, their goals only to achieve higher rates of technology sales, industry rates, ect.) will not approve. Soon, I believe, we'll have to start over again somehow. We'll have to let the earth settle for many, many generations, let plants revive, let animals evolve into higher states, and rebuild the O-zone layer. It will take millions of generations to come, but it might be possible if we work together to make it happen.

Answer 9

no
arable land is decreasing ,because of rising seas ,overgrazing ,desertification,erosian and bad farming practises
farmers are getting less ,because their sons are moving to the cities
or they have lost their lands

in china 900 vilages are running for their lives from all devouring dust storms
what used to be productive farmers are now hungry refugees.and this is happening in many places

world polulation has doubled in the last 50 years .more than we have increased since the dinosaurs.

and with every 1 degree increase in temperature we loose 10 % production of harvests

Answer 10

Nope, not even close. The human footprint grows exponentially along with population. Resources are infinite, you do the math.