Human Population & Our Planet
Per our textbook: “Essential Biology with
Physiology by Campbell” studied here at South University, on page: four hundred
and twenty-two it states: “The
human population grew rapidly during the 1900s and is currently more than seven
billion. A shift from high birth and death rates to low birth and death rates
has lowered the rate of growth in more developed countries. In developing
nations, death rates have dropped, but birth rates are still high.” ~End quote.
The study of population size, density, and
distribution is called demography. Over one hundred thousand years ago, there were fewer than
a billion people on this planet we call home. As we look at it today, there are
over six billion.
Because of
collective learning, humans are different than animals. As humans, we create
the ability to innovate.
Humans will often
reach a limit and find themselves over populating an area, but then we will
innovate and create. With this new technology, say gas, or electric, or even a
new dam to sustain the water in a certain area, we move onto a new area, and
begin populating it as well. This is how we as humans have kept surviving. With
the new area, we’ve developed a new skill, and now we advance even further. Per
se, the dam that we have created allowing the water to well up, will allow us
to learn to wash our clothes, and then forge on creating water ways into our
homes, and then after that sewer systems and water plants. With this
innovation, comes jobs for more people, and growth.
Population growth has by no means always
been smooth. Over the long term, demographic dips have occurred, some of them
severe. Recent genetic research in human DNA has shown that about on hundred
thousand years ago, the existing human population took a headlong dive. We can
only assume about the reasons for this decline, but it may have left as few as
ten thousand adult men and women in the world. Yes, the entire world, because
of catastrophe and even weather conditions. Humans suffered in the beginning,
learning how to survive was far from easy for a brand-new race of beings.
In
the sixteenth century, the Indian population of the Americas may have dropped
as much as ninety five percent. The principal cause was contact with people
from Eurasia and Africa, who carried a variety of infectious diseases
previously unknown in the Western Hemisphere. In the twentieth century, wars,
revolutions, genocides, epidemics, and famines have carried off tens of
millions of people within periods of as little as a single year. None of these
disasters, however, offset the accelerating population growth of recent times,
even for a short time.
Much until 1804
the human population was kept in check by disease, climate fluctuations, and
many other social factors. It was shortly after that, that humans learned how
to grow, and how to do it successfully. We created vaccines, we learned what
kinds of things were causing ailments, the earth had finally stopped changing
as much, and finally we could advance. In doing so, we managed to start growing
and death seemed to stop.
Then there were babies born in 1946, more
than ever before: three point four million, twenty percent more than in 1945.
This was the beginning of the so-called “baby boom.” In 1947, another three
point eight million babies were born; three point nine million were born in 1952;
and more than four million were born every year from 1954 until 1964, when the
boom finally ended. By then, there were seventy-six point four million “baby
boomers” in the United States. They made up almost forty percent of the
nation’s population.
What
caused the “baby boom?” This seems to be argument still, but if you honestly
look at what was happening prior, the recovery of the ‘great depression’ does
seem more logical than anything. Others argue it was communism and they were
trying to fight the ‘cold war’ and build up the population.
Life expectancy
has jumped from 1960 increasing us to live another twenty years. This means
while we are living another twenty years longer, we are still consuming,
breathing, doing, wasting, and doing. Sure, to us it seems like a good thing,
but to our Earth it does not.
Per the Global
Footprint Network: “Today humanity uses the equivalent of one point five to
provide resources we use to absorb our waste. This means it now takes the Earth
one year and six months to regenerate what we use in a year.”
Allow me to
explain something a little easier to grasp, if I may: an
American has an ecological footprint almost nine times larger than an Indian—so
while the population of India far exceeds that of the United States, in terms
of environmental damage, it is the American consumption of resources that is
causing the higher level of damage to the planet.
Now mind you, those of you who have
witnessed those commercials, “Feed this hungry child for two cents a day and
we’ll send you the child’s photo…” The places that are like this, are lands
that not in America. Though, yes, there are hungry and starved Children in
America, there are no where as many. Overseas, you will find starving children
who are literally in need of nutrition and vitamins and medical care.
Now if we as American’s and as humans are
sending money and people over there to inoculate, and feed these starving
children, will eventually their population be sustainable? Will they be able to
make it on their own? I know we are also educating them, and clothing them, and
showing them the ways of ‘our world’ if you will. Is this a good thing? In the
long run, they will be generating more waste, and populating more. As well as
living longer. Is this good for our planet? Do we even know or care? I don’t
think so, I think humans think like this: “Take care of the needy. These people
are in need. The planet will take care of itself.” Guess what? The planet
cannot take care of itself, if ‘we’ are destroying it quicker than it can
repair itself.
Humans are now seeing the damage they are
causing, thanks to places like “Global Footprint Network” as well as other
agencies that are seeing, and even feeling the impact we are causing on our
planet, humans are starting to make changes.
We are creating birth control products
that can last up to three years. This is a step in the over population, we are
trying to stop the population. Many people have even deemed themselves worthy
of vasectomies and tubal’s, to be certain births will stop. Adoptions are being
used for the children already in the network, no matter their age, parents who
cannot conceive are encourage to adopt first. The risk of trying infertility
medications usually causes complications including more than one child at a
time. This is a risk, and parents are discouraged, but this step does not
always work.
Along with this, the public is being
educated about the environment, about waste, about the mistakes we have made in
the past and are continuing to make.
Another step includes a simple one:
manners: less is more. Meaning, number one, if your parents have taught you
this like most of us have learned: “Don’t eat with your eyes.” In other words,
if you are still hungry afterwards, then you can go back for seconds. Also:
“Waste not want not.” I remember hearing when I was growing up: “Clean your
plate, there are starving kids in Africa who wish they could have your food
right now.” Some of those sayings are helpful. However, if you have a parent
who over filled your plate themselves, and told you to clean your plate, then
you overate. The size of an adult hand is a serving size. Remember that.
Another thing that we could be doing is:
taking shorter showers, or for some we could even shower or bathe together when
it comes to Children. Again, the saying is less is more.
What is ‘Carrying Capacity’? It is just
like it sounds. If you have ever been on an elevator, it tells you its
‘carrying capacity’ usually around a ton or two. The Earth has a capacity limit
as well, just as you do, or you will gain or lose weight yourself.
Carrying capacity defined within its
population is as follows: a population’s
carrying capacity is the size at which a population can no longer grow due to
lack of supporting resources. All populations have a carrying capacity. Just as
I have mentioned your human body, once you take it to its carrying capacity, it
then starts to look obese or fat. It is then too full and beyond its capacity. With
population expected to reach nine point five billion by 2050, many wonder if
our natural resources can keep up with our growing demands.
With our planets continued growth people
worry that population growth will eventually cause an environmental catastrophe.
But you see: the problem is bigger and more complex than just counting bodies,
as I have tried to explain within my wording to you here.
Did you know forests have almost
disappeared because we needed to clear them to plant more crops, to give animals
a place to graze and to supply us with wood and other raw materials? Here we
are humans destroying our home, thinking it is all justifiable, when in the
long run, it is not.
Ecological restoration is expensive. Can
countries afford to do it? And can they afford not to? Is it too late? And
shouldn’t we at least try to help repair the damage that we have caused? To
repair the damages humans have already caused can cost billions of dollars,
look at the Everglade project in Florida currently in 2016 for example. Then
again, look at the repair we do when hurricanes and tornadoes come in. FEMA is
spending millions to repair the damage there, caused naturally, but here again:
maybe that natural disaster is the Earth giving us a sign. A burp like in the
beginning of time, when the planet was full of gases. It is high time for
change, and everyone has an opinion about it. Would we be causing more damage,
or should we do it? In order to make a repair, can we be causing more damage
still. And the final question, is the repair we are doing, the right one, on
the right path? Only time will tell, but do we even have time?
Foretelling the future is difficult:
Ehrlich's 1981 prediction that half of Earth's species would be lost by the
year 2000 now looks more than a little hyperbolic. Still, Farley advises
applying a precautionary principle: "We should not be standing at the edge
of the precipice; we should be moving back from it."
References:
https://digitalbookshelf.southuniversity.edu
March 13, 2017
http://www.nova.org.au/outpacing-earth February 13, 2017
http://www.footprintnetwork.org/
2017 Global Footprint Network
