You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What drives population growth - food or energy? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
GliderGuider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-21-07 12:37 AM
Original message
What drives population growth - food or energy?
Advertisements [?]
http://www.paulchefurka.ca/PopulationFoodEnergy.html

A common assumption among population analysts is that food availability is the main driver of population growth. In fact, most will go so far as to define the carrying capacity of an environment primarily in terms of the food that it offers to the population under consideration. I have two major problems with this approach to population and carrying capacity, as outlined below.

My first objection is that this approach treats carrying capacity as a variable, and the expansion of agriculture as an increase in carrying capacity. This requires a definition of carrying capacity I do not subscribe to. The definition I am most comfortable with is, "The population level that an environment can support over the long term without damaging the ecology of the environment". An expansion of agriculture does not meet this definition because putting new land under the plow or increasing the production of existing farmland affects habitat, biodiversity, water levels and soil fertility among many environmental factors. In effect the expansion of agriculture requires that we draw on the natural capital of the environment. The repayment of this withdrawn capital does not enter the ecological equation as it should. The result is, by definition, not sustainable. In fact, the form of organized agriculture (which I have heard playfully called "totalitarian agriculture") practiced for the last ten thousand years is by definition unsustainable, especially when you consider that virtually all of the arable land on the planet is now under cultivation. Now, my definition of carrying capacity may be too strict and may be disputed by other ecologists, but it's the one that seems most comprehensive and reasonable to me.

My second problem is that energy is never mentioned in mainstream analyses that focus on food. The possibility that this omission may be wrong-headed is hinted at by the well-known studies that found 7 to 10 calories of fossil fuel embedded in every calorie of food we eat. In fact, I have developed a strong suspicion that rising per capita energy consumption has even more to do with population increase than rising food production. To investigate this possibility I created the graph below. It shows population, per capita grain consumption and per capita primary energy consumption from 1965 to 2005, all scaled to allow a visual estimate of correlation.




More at the link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -What drives population growth - food or energy? GliderGuider  Aug-21-07 12:37 AM   #0 
  - Population growth...  TwoSparkles   Aug-21-07 12:47 AM   #1 
  - ;-) Thanks for that ;-)  GliderGuider   Aug-21-07 12:50 AM   #2 
  - "Love Day" on the Democratic Underground  TheBorealAvenger   Aug-21-07 10:14 AM   #7 
  - I've always agreed with this assessment.  Gregorian   Aug-21-07 01:04 AM   #3 
  - There is no doubt, food is "derived" from energy  tom_paine   Aug-21-07 07:58 AM   #5 
  - The fact that energy correlates better than food  GliderGuider   Aug-21-07 08:07 AM   #6 
  - People who live in mud huts in DR Congo  XemaSab   Aug-21-07 03:17 PM   #14 
  - Actually, I think that population growth...  dchill   Aug-21-07 02:29 AM   #4 
  - Energy  NoMoreMyths   Aug-21-07 10:23 AM   #8 
  - Neither. Human intentionality.  HamdenRice   Aug-21-07 10:34 AM   #9 
  - Ah. So we can quit growing any time we want?  GliderGuider   Aug-21-07 10:43 AM   #10 
     - As a cynical son of a bitch, claims we are not animals always surprise me.  hunter   Aug-21-07 01:50 PM   #12 
  - Sex. nt  Javaman   Aug-21-07 01:34 PM   #11 
  - This is a bullshit analysis  XemaSab   Aug-21-07 03:15 PM   #13 
  - You could be right. But then you need to answer this question:  GliderGuider   Aug-21-07 03:26 PM   #15 
     - I'd say the answer is that energy is not yet a limited resource  XemaSab   Aug-21-07 03:59 PM   #16 
        - Almost  GliderGuider   Aug-21-07 04:06 PM   #17 
  - Condom-grabbing holy rollers. n/t  skids   Aug-21-07 05:24 PM   #18 
  - I don't think you're looking at the right data sets  depakid   Aug-21-07 07:34 PM   #19 
  - Actually, I went back and looked at something simpler  GliderGuider   Aug-21-07 08:36 PM   #20 
     - What would happen if you broke the analysis down  depakid   Aug-21-07 09:29 PM   #21 
        - There's no question that high energy consuming countries have lower TFR  GliderGuider   Aug-21-07 10:04 PM   #22 
  - Without the sun, we're goners.  SimpleTrend   Aug-21-07 10:44 PM   #23 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC