Forecast Earth

Loving ourselves to death

Jay Weinstein

The middle school science experiment was simple: Mix dried grass and water in a jar, and look at a drop of the water under a microscope once a week.

Week 1: Grassy water.
Week 2: Occasional micro-organisms swimming around (amoebae, paramecium, etc.).
Week 3: Teeming with life (hundreds of micro-organisms packed into a single droplet).
Week 4: Water smells sour, looks murky, and carries only a few surviving micro-organisms.
Week 5: Water has become foul-smelling sludge, devoid of life. Micro-organisms have died from living in high concentrations of their own waste in a closed system.

Reality check: We're living in a closed system, increasingly swimming in our own waste. Global human population, which was 2.5 billion in 1950, is now 6.5 billion. If I live to normal life expectancy, I'll survive to see the population exceed 10 billion, unless something dramatic changes.

I hope something dramatic changes. We're so attached to our own importance, that the very subject of limiting our population growth is a taboo subject.

This year CNN produced "Planet in Peril," an exquisite series about threats to nature worldwide. Like virtually every nature show that exposes the effects of deforestation, poaching, habitat loss, suburban sprawl, unsustainable farming, industrial pollution, or other man-made threats to wildlife, it couched admonitions about the threats in terms of a lack of education or poverty.

It was because people were poor that they poached endangered species for bush meat or sold the parts on the black market. It was because people were ignorant that they fished species to the brink of extinction. It was never because the ever-growing human population simply was an insatiable juggernaut.

Population overload is the elephant in the room in the environmental debate, because so many religions, nationalities, and ethnic mores encourage their adherents to procreate. China's once-child policy is considered an abridgement of human rights, which is roundly criticized in the West.

Water shortages, food shortages, squabbles over natural resources, are attributed to poverty again and again, because the word "overpopulated" is too politically hot to touch. Only a handful of organizations dare to address the subject, most notably the nonprofits Population Connection and Negative Population Growth.

I support greater use of organic farming to reduce fossil fuel dependence and cut into agricultural chemical pollution that's wiping out birds, marine life, and other living things. But I also know that the single biggest threat to wildlife survival is habitat loss. And organic agriculture requires more land to compensate for lower yields than conventional (chemically fertilized, pesticide-sprayed) crops. There isn't enough farmland on earth to grow organic food for our 6.5 billion brethren (especially with our growing taste for meat, which requires way more land than plant-based food does).

To all those couples thinking for having that second child, I recommend adoption. For concerned citizens of the world looking or a way to address pollution, shortages, global warming, and most other global environmental issues, I recommend focusing on initiatives to slow population growth. It's the one common thread between all of those issues and many more.

Email IM Bookmark del.icio.us Digg

You do not appear to have Yahoo! Messenger installed. Click here to download and install it.

Email this article

There is a problem with one or more email addresses entered

Enter email addresses, separated by commas.

There is a problem with the email address entered

Email addresses will only be used to email this information on your behalf and will not be used for any marketing purposes.

Alerts

Get an alert for updates:
  • from this author
  • on Health
  • on Science
  • on Nature
  • on Pollution
  • on Activism
  • on Waste

View All Green Alerts »

comments from our community

Showing 1 - 5 of 5 comments

Post Comment
  • Posted by Teresa Cuervo Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:22pm PST
    Good ideas but highly controversial, particularly the latter!
    Report Abuse
  • Posted by Jane Tue Dec 30, 2008 2:52pm PST
    The problem is more in the populations which ARE breeding rather than the fact that it is occurring. If people had to take IQ tests or prove their worth on this planet to earn the right to reproduce, the world would be better off. There is great need for highly educated, ethically and environmentally sound, even activist people to create more children so that this world has some leaders in the revolution and reform period. And adoption? Seriously? I'm going to raise someone whose genes have predetermined them to be a lazy, irresponsible slob just like their parents who weren't smart enough to discover birth control or abortion? Come on...adoption isn't the answer, sterilization in masses is.
    Report Abuse
  • Posted by The Beans and Rice Guy Thu Jan 1, 2009 12:25pm PST
    Wow, Amber thanks for insulting me. I'm adopted, college educated, give to numerous charity, produce less than one cubit foot of garbage per year, vegan, and understand that everyone(!) has the potential within themselves to be compassionate, responsible humans. Many of those "highly educated, ethically and environmentally sound, even activist people" come from right-wing "conservative", racist families. Sterilization in masses??? Who decides who gets sterilized? You? Me? No insult to you; but your way of thinking reminds me of the Nazi menatality. We citizens of the U.S.A., who have access to great education, are also the world's greatest pollutors, responsible for more greenhouse gases than any other nation. Do not equate supposed high intelligence with compassion. The people of the world who still live off the land, respect the land; even though they don't have access to "higher" education.
    Report Abuse
  • Posted by R Fri Jan 2, 2009 4:20am PST
    I also believe that world population is a major environment problem. I also believe that is link to many many other problems in the world, especially when we talk about wars. I dream an Earth with a population of 500-800 millions people. In that circumstance I imagine a roughly equal distributed standard of living, longer life expectancy, stable international relations, healthy environment and overall advancement in human development.
    Report Abuse
  • Posted by Garrett K Fri Jan 2, 2009 7:43pm PST
    Jay, my man, you hit the nail right on the head, the human species so called intelligence, creativity and ability to adapt has allowed us to overrun the planet and diminish much of its resources, by essentially living outside the normal checks and balances rest of the natural world faces. My wife and I recently had a son, and as a teen I read many books about overpopulation. We are thinking of having one more. Is this bad?? We are strong believers that after two if we want more...we will adopt...it is the responsible thing to do, but I agreee, no prominent public figure that wants to keep their job, will ever bring it up in this country. I also agree Arion, on the Nazi thing, great in theory, bad in practice. Please continue to talk about overpopulation on this site, it needs to be talked about in a thoughtful, mature manner. Thank you. G
    Report Abuse

Leave a Comment:

You must first sign in.

Green Picks Playlist