Panic buying of petrol

[Leon]

Basically we have too many people on the planet. When I was born the global population was 3.2 billion, now it is 7.8 billion. When I was at Uni in 1983, the automotive industry knew that it couldn't allow China to become a car owning state, due to the pollution emitted given its population size. Really I think we are talking about sticking plaster solutions when major surgery is required .

There was an interesting BBC article about this last year, where the number of babies being born per person is falling dramatically and the population in some countries will have halved by the end of this century.  Japan is projected to fall from 128 million to only 53 million, Italy from 61m to 28m over the same timeframe. 

"As a result, the researchers expect the number of people on the planet to peak at 9.7 billion around 2064, before falling down to 8.8 billion by the end of the century."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53409521

[Raider4]

Blimey, Nigeria's going to be crowded!

[Steve J]

Having lived in Nigeria with a population of over a 100 million in the mid 90's, I dread to think what it will be like if the projected figures are correct . Large parts of the North are uninhabitable due to increasing desertification (leading to ever increasing ethnic tensions and killings), so the already over crowded cities will only get worse.

And yes Dave, I have been busy, which is why my back hurts

[mmcv]

Hang on a minute, They can't even get a standardized Phone Charger, let alone a standard size and shaped and weight battery that will fit multiple makes of car.

Haha yes, well for the car battery it is only for the same company. But for phone chargers they've got it down to a couple of ones, so it's pretty much just Apple using one type and everyone else (including Apple on some devices) using the other. Might be more impetus for it on cars though given the infrastructural implications.

Then again, if it has to be organised by governments.... 

"As a result, the researchers expect the number of people on the planet to peak at 9.7 billion around 2064, before falling down to 8.8 billion by the end of the century."

The issue with that though, as being seen already in some countries including the UK, is the economic impact of an aging retired population and no young workers to support them. Also suspect there damage will have been done by the time the population starts dropping off again 

[Orcs]

The issue with that though, as being seen already in some countries including the UK, is the economic impact of an aging retired population and no young workers to support them. Also suspect there damage will have been done by the time the population starts dropping off again 

We need pestilence plague and famine to reduce the population.  One down two to go

[Elliesdad]

The obvious answer is that the planet has too many people but with only a finite (and decreasing) amount of resources.

Fewer people should mean that the rate at which humans "use" the resources is slowed down.

Then again, vast number of people these days feel they are "entitled" so it can be difficult to get them to accept the changing situation.
For example, I used to work with a guy (in Sheffield, England) who had a flat/apartment in Barcelona (Spain)  so he could "pop over for plenty of weekends-away". But what about all the cost of flying to/from Barcelona, both £££ and carbon footprint etc?
I can genuinely see a time when many (most?) humans will not be able to "go to Dubai" for the weekend, let alone visit the temples in Southeast Asia. In some respects I have no problem with that. We have to carefully look after our resources and not squander them...

One final note - I heard of one guy complaining he'd tried unsuccessfully to fill his petrol tank with fuel. He spent 2 hours (yes, two hours) trying to buy more petrol. I wonder if he could see the irony at all...?

Geoff

[mmcv]

Thankfully the panic hasn't affected us here, petrol station was fairly empty if people this evening. Not seen any queues at all.

I suspect we'll not be able to reduce the overall population without some pretty nasty measures. Even a one child policy won't help without a massive population redistribution.

We needed to be taking those steps decades ago. That's why I think the only solution now is to go through, using technology and progress. People, at least many of them, are ultimately too selfish and self absorbed to "plant trees under whose shade they'll never sit".

[steve_holmes_11]

I'm just holding out for driverless electric cars like they've trialled in some places. Automatic cars that you can just ping when you need them and the nearest one comes to you. Same for modular public transport and HGVs. Once we get us meatsacks away from behind the wheel transportation will become many times more efficient and safer. No need for traffic lights, calming measures, roundabouts, speed limits...just a full autonomous transportation system.

Of course, it'll be a while yet before that's viable anywhere but big cities, but it's a start!

That Raymond Baxter off of the Tomorrow's Worlds promised me flying cars by 2000.

[Elliesdad]

People, at least many of them, are ultimately too selfish and self absorbed to "plant trees under whose shade they'll never sit".

That's because vast numbers of people believe they are "special".
Normal rules don't apply to them and they should have everything & anything they want (because they are special, after all).
The special ones don't have to take a turn in a queue, or wait until they've saved money to buy something - they "want what they want", and they want it immediately, now, without delay.
The rest of the world, seemingly, just needs to bow to the every whim of the special ones.

No. For humanity to continue, to enjoy a decent standard of living in a pleasant, healthy natural world then I suspect we are going to have to make some painful decisions. Yet it seems that many - even in Governments - are reluctant to "grasp the nettle" and seize the opportunity now, while we still can.
It hardly fills me with confidence.

[Raider4]

That Raymond Baxter off of the Tomorrow's Worlds promised me flying cars by 2000.

Wasn't the oil supposed to have run out by then anyway?

[steve_holmes_11]

Bear in mind that human development, and population growth have been closely linked to most effective harnessing of energy resources.

Unfashionable as it is, we are still in the petrochemical age.
If we cannot find an efficient replacement before the supplies run short, we will go into decline.
If we crack fusion power or some other miracle energy, we may continue to grow.

Wars have been remarkably inefficient at reducing human population.
Now obviously letting off all the Nukes at once would make an interesting exception.
But a few Armageddon fans aside, we don't wish to go there.

Natural disasters leading to widespread harvest failure, or diseases have had far greater effect.

Most of the west's disease preparation has been focused on the day when our Antibiotics lose their powers.
A good deal of the post Antibiotic planning has been practiced during the first 6 months of covid.

If I know what would happen next, I'd buy a lottery ticket.

[sultanbev]

Basically we have too many people on the planet. When I was born the global population was 3.2 billion, now it is 7.8 billion. When I was at Uni in 1983, the automotive industry knew that it couldn't allow China to become a car owning state, due to the pollution emitted given its population size. Really I think we are talking about sticking plaster solutions when major surgery is required .

Exactly. People have done the maths and the sustainable carrying capacity of the planet is c500,000,000. Or it was, on an undamaged planet. 97% of the planet's surface has been degraded by human activity in some form, so even that is questionable. As I put on other forums:

This is not a climate crisis.
Climate chaos is merely a symptom of the predicament we are in.
It's not even a crisis of capitalism. Whatever -ism we would have had after WW2 would have got us to the same place.
It's not even a crisis of overpopulation and overconsumption (although they both play a huge part)

It is a crisis of civilisation itself. How humans organise, feed and equip themselves whilst staying within the ecological limits of a now resource-famished planet along with all the other species on the planet.

[mmcv]

That's because vast numbers of people believe they are "special".

Yeah and most of them are in positions of power so have no incentive to change things, and will likely be gone by the time it gets really bad. Ultimately appeals to conscience will only go so far, need to create a situation, either through social shame or pragmatic self interest for people to make changes. There is a growing movement towards social attitudes pressuring the big problem makers, but suspect it comes too late. Maybe we should be looking into underwater biospheres? Then we can survive a few more generations and properly mess up the rest of the ocean too (though not much left we've not ruined). Or get building those generational spaceships...

But yeah, realistically our best bet are some bright scientists finding solutions, like the plastic eating bacteria, new power sources with less negative side effects, more efficient ways to use what we have already.

That Raymond Baxter off of the Tomorrow's Worlds promised me flying cars by 2000.

Here you go, only a little late www.bbc.com/news/technology-57651843. Do we really need flying cars though?

[FierceKitty]

The obvious answer is that the planet has too many people but with only a finite (and decreasing) amount of resources.

Fewer people should mean that the rate at which humans "use" the resources is slowed down.

Then again, vast number of people these days feel they are "entitled" so it can be difficult to get them to accept the changing situation.
For example, I used to work with a guy (in Sheffield, England) who had a flat/apartment in Barcelona (Spain)  so he could "pop over for plenty of weekends-away". But what about all the cost of flying to/from Barcelona, both £££ and carbon footprint etc?
I can genuinely see a time when many (most?) humans will not be able to "go to Dubai" for the weekend, let alone visit the temples in Southeast Asia. In some respects I have no problem with that. We have to carefully look after our resources and not squander them...

One final note - I heard of one guy complaining he'd tried unsuccessfully to fill his petrol tank with fuel. He spent 2 hours (yes, two hours) trying to buy more petrol. I wonder if he could see the irony at all...?

Geoff

May I visit a few temples in Southeast Asia if I walk? My favourite is about four miles away.

[flamingpig0]

That Raymond Baxter off of the Tomorrow's Worlds promised me flying cars by 2000.

Edgar Rice Burroughs promised underdressed incredibly hot female Martians.