The Population Hubbub

http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=984

In The Overpopulation Hubbub (29th September 2009) published on the Neurological Blog website is an opinion blog written by Steven Novella that states the arguments that people have been debating about overpopulation. The arguments made about overpopulation in the article are simple: the effects of overpopulation will have little effect on our environment and that overpopulation will bring upon the demise of our earth. Novella takes the side of that overpopulation is almost a myth and that overpopulation will not become a problem now or in the future because of technological advances in fields such as farming, more efficient appliances and so on. However, technology alone will not help sustain the problems of overpopulation forever. Novella states:

“Doom and gloom predictions over the last century about population increase and dwindling resources have not come true. Reading the Ehrlich’s warning about rising death rates sound a lot like the predictions of massive die offs that have been made and failed to manifest on a regular basis over the previous decades”

One of the arguments made in Novella’s blog states the inaccuracy of people and scientists ability to predict the future. There is no evidence behind his argument except for the fact that overpopulation has yet to have a serious negative effect on the world. The future is always ahead of us so something could always happen. A statement like that is inaccurate to say because predictions have to be made for warnings or else it could be too late. Novella shows no proper reference to this statement but states that only in his opinion. Also he states that the current population is 7 billion people and by 2050 it is estimated to reach 9 billion. Now there are two falsifications with this. First, he did not properly reference this fact. Second, he is using this fact to back his argument that technology will save us from the consequences of overpopulation. However he contradicts himself by saying that the future is usually inaccurately predicted.

Some of Novella’s arguments come from two sets of people: Paul and Anne Ehrlich who have the more pessimistic view and Jesse Ausubel who is the optimist. Ehrlich’s view on overpopulation sees it as a growing issue while Ausubel’s view sees the issues of overpopulation will rely on technology.

From Ausubel’s view, he is the optimist, and feels there is no need to panic. He states the our population is growing by 1% but crops are increasing at 2% allowing to grow more food on less land (Novella 2009). But the abundance of food is not the only problem. The more people the more wastes produced. Also, with the abundance of food in our world, would that not promote the population to increase? He also states that we can rely on technological advances to give solutions to problems. But there are some things that technology cannot fix such as the actions of humans. Technology cannot pursue an average human to spend that extra money on that more efficient light bulb or that highly gas efficient car. As sad as it is to say, I believe fossil fuels will always be the dominant fuel for energy because of its abundance, cheaper price and simplicity. Overpopulation will increase the amount of carbon dioxide expelled into our air. Already, scientists see the Great Barrier Reef off the coast of Australia becoming extinct in 20 years because of the increase of temperature in the ocean due to the amount of carbon dioxide in the air. The Reef brings in over 300 billion dollars from tourism. Alternative forms of energy I think will only be used after fossil fuels are all used or when fossil fuels become scarce and the price of it will increase. Charlie Veron, former chief scientist of the Australian Institute of Marine Science said:

"Once carbon dioxide had hit the levels predicted for between 2030 and 2060, all coral reefs were doomed to extinction," Veron said. "They would be the world's first global ecosystem to collapse. I have the backing of every coral reef scientist, every research organization. I've spoken to them all. This is critical. This is reality( Wooldridge, 2009)"

In conclusion, Novella’s arguments must be backed up with more valid references instead of his own opinion. The quotes Novella uses must be proper citied or else invalidity occurs. It does make sense that technology may be able to help us cope with overpopulation for now, but as the increase of technology comes the increase in healthcare and medical advances allowing the sustainability for people to live longer. Therefore, I think eventually overpopulation is an equilibrium process. I think the population will reach a peak, and we will not be able to sustain the amount of people on the earth with the limited resources on earth. The population will then decrease, then the amount of resources will be more abundant and then population will increase once again.

References:

Novella, S. (2009) The Overpopulation Hubbub. Neurologica Blog, General Science. Sept 28th/2009 http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=984 Accessed September 29th/2009

Wooldridge, F Great Barrier Reef: Victim of Human Overpopulation. September 11th/2009http://www.officialwire.com/main.php?action=posted_news&rid=23690&catid=862 Accessed September 28th/2009