News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on 60 years later, is it time to update the Drake equation?. Parent comment

Re:60 years later, is it time to update the Drake equation? by m_mueller on Tuesday May 18, 2021 @09:48PM (#27203647)
Consider that a lot of materials we take for granted today (and throw in the trash when we're done) aren't renewable either and would take more energy to produce if replaced with renewable equivalents.

Consider also that in order to grow human population at some point you start to need large amounts of energy to colonize new space, be it planetary, on asteroids or spade stations.

If more energy becomes available, demand for it will scale accordingly because of new possibilities.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:60 years later, is it time to update the Drake equation? by shard on Tuesday May 18, 2021 @11:57PM (#27204358)
Considering the plummeting birth rate, I don't think it will be necessary to colonize new space to find space for more people, unless we start cloning people en mass.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:60 years later, is it time to update the Drake equation? by m_mueller on Wednesday May 19, 2021 @02:55AM (#27205437)
According to Hans Rosling, if birthrates develop everywhere similarly, population will max out at around 10Bn within the next decades, and should then stay stable for a while. 10Bn to reach a somewhat comfortable living standard seems quite a stretch for the home planet based on current (mostly non-renewable) technologies. And a high enough standard is also necessary for the birth rates to stabilize, so it's not like keeping whole continents in poverty would help anyone.
[ Parent | on HN ]