Land is hardly the most limiting resource; in fact, it's well down the list, below:
- fresh water
- food
- waste carrying capacity (waterways, atmosphere)
- physical resources (metals, wood, concrete, oil and other energy forms)
Heck, there's even a worsening shortage of sand suitable for construction use, worldwide: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/05/opinion/why-sand-is-disapp...
Re:The Case for Making Humans Smaller
by paulsutter on Sunday November 15, 2015 @07:49AM
(#10569473)
A better source of energy solves any limitations on water and food. And "waste carrying capacity" is another term for pollution - as I said there are better ways to manage pollution.
Yes that takes technology, but the problem is mismanagement of resources, we aren't running out.
"The situation we’re in isn’t a looming wall that we’re doomed to crash into. It’s a race – a race between depletion and pollution of natural resources on one side, and our pace of innovation on the other."
- http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/the-limits-of...
Haha, we use up EVERYTHING.
The problem isn't physically occupying space, it's resource consumption. Humans themselves don't consume much space in total - the entire 2010 population could 'stand on zanzibar', as the book title predicted: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand_on_Zanzibar#Title
Yes exactly. The current population would fit into a 1km sided cube.
Volume of a human = 67 l [1]
Double this for packing errors = 134 l = .134 ㎥
.134 x 7.13 billion = 955,000,000 ㎥
< 1 ㎦
[1] http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=volume+of+a+human+being
Switching power sources is the actual problem. And let's choose one that's also cheaper and more plentiful. Most of the other problems can be overcome with more and cheaper energy (like water for example).
But it's ludicrous to say the earth is nearly full.