300 Million – Part Two

So, today we are now a country of 300 million people facing an uncertain future together.  What are the issues that we will have to deal with as a country as our population grows from this number, and what can we anticipate as we look at global population growth?

The United States currently has an average of 86 people per square mile, which is much lower than many other developed countries.  Even when we absorb another 100 million, which is projected to be around 2043-45 our population density will be lower than some European countries are now.  Where this statistic is misleading is that as a nation we all seem to want to live in similar places. The Center for Environment and Population has calculated that over half the population lives within 50 miles of the coasts.  The states in the heartland, such as the Dakotas, Nebraska, and Kansas are either losing population or experiencing minimum growth.  The trend line is clear: mega cities on both coasts and a wide open, sparsely populated middle.  This trend will be tempered by connectivity and increasingly disparate real estate prices.

How many people do we want to have, do we manage population growth and what do we need to do to support further population increase? We must begin to reflect on the answers to these questions.  Take for example the Southwest, one of the fastest growing areas of the U.S.  Basically the states of the Southwest are desert states.  These states are now beginning to face the inevitable problem of too many people and too little water.  If we decide to let the population growth continue in this area there will need to be discussions about better ways to recycle water, desalination plants for ocean water and radically new ways to think about what is now becoming a finite resource, water.

On the crowded coasts, is it not time to rethink public transportation?  Now that it seems that the area from Boston to Washington D.C. is basically one megalopolis why not create new rail lines combined with bus lines to better serve everyone and at the same time making a concerted effort to manage oil and gas consumption, another ultimately finite resource?  Obviously the general infrastructure of the country, particularly on the coasts will need to be rebuilt.  Why not combine the rebuilding of the grid and infrastructure with a new intelligent look at mass transit?  If we don’t want to do these things then the morally difficult effort to aggressively manage population growth becomes the only alternative

 In this new global age, it is becoming apparent to all that Spaceship Earth is ultimately finite and therefore endless and unmanaged growth is unsustainable.  Humanity must start to think about what it will have to do in the years ahead to preserve the planet and ourselves.  What compromises to life as we now know it must we accept if we accept continued population growth?  We must have our thinking catch up to population growth and soon.  Our thinking about these issues has not changed much in the past few centuries at  the same time as population growth has created unwanted consequences.

It took humanity approximately 150,000 years to reach the population of 1 billion in 1804.  It then took 123 years to reach 2 billion in 1927, 33 years to 3 billion in 1960, 14 years to 4 billion in 1974 13 years to 5 billion in 1987, 12 years to 6 billion in 1999.  The slim good news here is that population growth is slowing as it is projected that it will take 14 years to reach 7 billion in 2013, 15 years to reach 8 billion and then 26 years to 9 billion in 2054.  Part of the future projections and slowing growth is based upon limitations of sustainability.

Has our thinking about all the issues around population growth kept pace with this rapid growth?  Of course it hasn’t.  We are still relatively close to our thinking 50 years ago when the global population is half what it is today.  We need to create a new comprehensive way to think about sustaining our society as we absorb millions of people each year nationally. and the tens of millions of people each year globally.  We need new leadership and thinking about this issue as the consequences for humanity are much greater than most issues that fill our minds today. 

Remember, we are talking about the lifetimes of our children and grandchildren.  Do we care about them?

[A note of thanks to Ben Meier, ace researcher, for research help on these two columns on population]
 

4 Responses to “300 Million – Part Two”

  1. Wesley Says:

    Speaking of children and grandchildren, if one wants to live near them in retirement, where are they going to live? Where do you want to live and how does the trends in David’s two posts affect our previous thoughts on retirement living? We’ve written about this in LifeTwo (see link by my name). Much to think about.

  2. Grant Says:

    David, it’s interesting you bring this up.

    Last Monday I flew a trip to the West Coast, and from 43,000 feet up I had a great view of the middle of nowhere USA.

    Places that are litterally in the middle of the dessert are becoming havens for people that want to “get away from it all” and own a sizable chunk of land. Farmington, NM has been growing like crazy, and there’s absolutely no industry to bring people to a place like that. Places in the rockies, like Durango, CO looked much the same: you could tell where the heart (the origins) of the city where but you could also see expansion of residential development 20 miles from the center of the city…

    And remember, there is no industry to bring people to places like these, but I have a feeling it’s the cheap land values that make it so attractive.

    -Grant
    TheCornerOfficeBlog.com

  3. Don Says:

    Jared Diamond, in his recent book ‘Collapse’, said something along the lines of “while many people seem to support the concept of growth in the abstract, I have met very few people who are particularly enthusiastic about seeing more growth and crowding in the area where they themselves live”.

    Indeed. And for those of us who live in the dry interior West of the United States — which was never meant to support large populations for the reason you cited (lack of water), population growth is clearly on a collision course with reality.

    For example: Las Vegas, as we speak, is agressively pushing ahead with plans to pipe water into its growing megatropolis from the groundwater of Spring Valley, which lies hundreds of miles north. Never mind that this gazillion-dollar project will be only a temporary fix (as long as the Vegas population continues to grow, and as long as recharge to this Mojave Desert aquifer remains sparse). Never mind that mining the groundwater of Spring Valley will severely drop water tables, dry up springs, and dry up ranches over a massive impact area of thousands of square miles. Never mind that Las Vegas is already a monstrous and ugly city with bad air and worse traffic which, um, really has nothing to gain from growth except more ugliness and more traffic.

    No matter: the gods of commerce must be appeased at all costs. The whole friggin’ crazy-ass madness of living as if we have no intention of dealing with the consequences will continue.

    “Growth for the sake of growth”, Edward Abbey once observed, “is the ideology of the cancer cell.”

  4. david Says:

    Great comment, wonderful quote!

    Please read my most recent post about a tipping point regarding energy. I think that the very beginnings of a perceptual change is now taking place. There still probably has to be some great amount of pain ahead to alter behavior, but I remain optimistic.