in overpopulation •  4 months ago

Congratulation humans!

You have now reached overpopulation!

Nobody seems to want to talk about it, but we are now in deep shit.

Yes - because of overpopulation!

Just go to YouTube and search for traffic congestion ... in Los Angeles ... in the Bay Area ... in India ... in China ... in Bangkok ... in Jakarta ... in Japan ... in Mexico City ... ALL OVER THE WORLD!

Current world population is about 7.6 BILLION PEOPLE.

Here are some country populations, for comparison and contrast...

China... 1.4 BILLION

India... 1.33 BILLION

Japan... 128 MILLION

The United States... 324 MILLION

Canada... 37 MILLION

Pakistan... 194 MILLION

Russia... 144 MILLION

Italy... 60 MILLION

Denmark... 5.8 MILLION

Australia... 24 MILLION

England... 53 MILLION

Currently the "winners" of the population game are China and India, the only two countries significantly past the 1-BILLION MARK! (Reminds me of the "How Many Served" signs at McDonalds)

Furthermore, wikipedia says, "The United Nations estimates [the world population] will further increase to 11.2 billion by the year 2100."

One of the biggest concerns you should have for the future, is energy. Specifically OIL.

If you study the oil industry, you would learn about the EROEI (Energy Return on Energy Invested / also called EROI for Energy Return on Invested).

In the early 1900s, the EROEI was around 80 to 1. Meaning, it took the equivalent energy in 1 barrel of oil to extract 80 barrels of oil from the ground. So the "profit" is 79 barrels, minus the energy cost to refine and transport it.

By about 1970, the EROEI had fallen to about 30. With more exotic methods used today, such as Canadian oil sand extraction and fracking, the EROEI is more likely around 10 or less.

As a result, getting oil out of the ground is getting much more expensive. Which means, gasoline prices will be on the rise, as the barrel of oil price rises.

Long story, short... Conventional drilling on land is the easiest and least costly method. Fracking is less productive and more expensive, as fracking depletes its oil source much faster. Deep water drilling is also extremely costly. And the "oil sands" in Canada might be the dirtiest, most expensive and least productive method, in which they knock down the trees in the forest, scrape the top soil away and dig up the underlying dirt/bitumen - a mixture of viscous oily sand, clay, dirt and yuck!

The oil companies go to places like deep water in the Gulf and the oil sands of Alberta, Canada, because the easy cheap stuff has already been discovered on land, and many of the oil fields, worldwide, are depleting. In other words, many of the producing reserves have past their peak.

Funny how China has about 1.4 Billion people, which is about 4.3 times the US population, and the US uses more oil than China. But that is projected to change in the not-too-distant future. Their consumption / demand is going UP!

This all ties in to the global financial system too. As a hint of what may be in the cards... its been reported that China will want to (or demand to) pay for oil using Chinese Yuan, instead of US Dollars. Heard of the "petrodollar?" Any idea of how that could wreak havoc in our economy and on the value of the dollar itself?

As time goes on, as oil reserves deplete, as the population continues to grow, as traffic congestion spirals out of control, you've got to wonder, is it possible that demand will surpass the capabilities to extract enough oil to keep up?

Also, consider, that oil is used in the manufacturing and production of plastics, rubber, asphalt, pharmaceuticals, pesticides, fertilizers, and many, many other things we've come to depend on.

So... getting back to the population issue...

Is there enough oil for everyone? How long will the joy ride last? Can the world keep up with increasing food production? Can the miners keep up with extracting enough of the things we require, like gold, silver, phosphorus, cobalt, lithium, cerium and other chemicals and minerals?

As some point the problem of overpopulation will correct itself.

The future population decline may come as a result of one more of the following... war, nuclear conflicts, starvation, disease, lawlessness.

Perhaps the most dangerous threat to us today is the man-made EMP. That is the Electromagnetic Pulse ... an explosion or burst of electromagnetic radiation, which basically gets into the power grid and can destroy electronics, which, in the worst case scenario, could knock out most electricity in a given region, potentially for months, if not beyond a year.

You can also add natural disasters in the mix. Things like major volcanic activity or a coronal mass ejection from the sun, which could have an impact similar to that of an EMP. Or, as the dinosaurs were killed off, we could suffer a similar fate with a large-enough meteor strike.

Perhaps, in such a cataclysmic event, our politicians will be the only survivors to emerge from their government bunkers. Of course, a world with only politicians might be as bad as the cataclysm itself.

In a finite world, with finite resources, it is a certainty that human population will reverse in the future.

The big question is what will cause it? And when?

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  trending

you're completely wrong.


@everittdmickey ... About everything? Did I get anything right?


most of the words were spelled correctly
Your conclusions were wrong...

almost all of the developed countries (those with a high standard of living) are experiencing population DECLINE.

A high standard of living is the best form of birth control

You're wrong about finite resources also.



Strange. Thought I spell checked all my words.

Anyway, the graph you're showing is, exactly, what I quoted from wikipedia, "The United Nations estimates [the world population] will further increase to 11.2 billion by the year 2100." So, thanks for supporting me on that.

Actually, earth is finite, so, by definition all of the resources we use are finite. Its more a matter of scarcity of some, for which reserves deplete and become more expensive and difficult to find and mine.


I SAID that you got the spelling right.
ain't spell check wonderful.
I SAID that your conclusions are wrong.
and no...all resources are NOT finite.
Read some julian simon


Sorry I misunderstood your statement "most of the words were spelled correctly" to mean some of the words were not spelled correctly. (I was just being picky! Moving on, now.)

I briefly read about some of Julian Simon's works, as you have suggested. I'll have to read more before I'd be willing to fall in line with your opinion. But on the brief info that I read, it appears he is saying that resources are not finite because technology will advance to enable us to keep extracting... or to recycle, or to use alternative resources. I'm sure there's more to it, and I'm looking forward to reading more Julian Simon, which I intend to do.

I've said a bunch of things in my article, and you claim that my conclusions are wrong.

Please let me know which one of my conclusions you consider to be "the most important" wrong conclusion that I've made.


your most important wrong conclusion is "oh woe...doom and gloom"



Unfortunately, I see a lot of gloom and doom - not for everyone but for way too many people. I believe a lot of people are deep in debt, because of a faulty and corrupt global financial system, which has been detached from a gold standard and depends on growing debt to keep things from falling apart.

If only half of the reports, articles and statistics I've seen and read over the past several years are correct, the real unemployment rate is much higher than the currently-reported number of 4.1%. I think it is closer to 20%.

It has also been reported that home ownership in the US is at its lowest point since the 1960s. Auto loans and student loan debt exceed one trillion dollars each, and most Americans are living paycheck-to-paycheck, with not enough spare cash to cover relatively-minor unexpected expenses, in the range of $1000 to $5000.

Look at the traffic in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and many other major cities around the world. To me that is gloomy. Having to spend 2 hours, one way, in traffic to get to your job, and then back home.

Five lanes of bumper-to-bumper traffic moving at snail-like speed looks a little like overpopulation to me. There are either too many people or too many cars. Or both. At least within the major city limits.

And, this morning, there are new reports of political turmoil in Saudi Arabia and a potential military conflict with Iran. Hopefully, that won't lead to a disruption in the flow of Saudi oil.

I'd much rather be reporting on a breakthrough in a new clean energy source, where everyone's lives will be easier, happier and more prosperous. But I think its a good idea to discuss possible bad outcomes, to at least prepare mentally - to know what is happening and why, if and when such disasters come our way.