How much population can Earth support before running out of natural resources

(253) Terigi Ciccone's answer to How much population can Earth accommodate before running out of its natural resources? - Quora

How much population can Earth accommodate before running out of its natural resources?

Terigi Ciccone October 26, 2023 Below is an eye-popping chart that contradicts the popular misunderstanding that population growth is out of control. Let’s look at a few key nodes. 1920–1940 is the introduction of fossil-powered farming equipment directly tied to increasing agricultural production. Second node 1960–1980 use and growth of synthetic fertilizer giving a second boost to agricultural production. 1900-today, the introduction of clean drinking water and sewage and hygiene. 1960–1990 expanding use of health care.

1970–2015 increasing worldwide education, especially for women. 1980 through 2100, all of the above plus continuing & expansion of education in the less developed world.

2100–2150 starts a global decline in world population estimated to level out at about 8–9 billion.

1

Below is the energy consumption forecast. It’s self-explanatory and closely matches the population trends with a 30–40-year lag.

Below is a most disturbing chart showing how demanding and wasteful wind turbines are in squandering our limited resources. This chart is from the book by Alex Epstein titled “The Moral Case For Fossil Fuels.” It shows how much materials are used to generate 2.5 Mw of electrical power. It clearly shows that wind turbines use about 100 times more metals, materials, and CO2-producing concrete than a comparable gas plant. But in my view, this chart is not really accurate and underestimates the problem in many ways.

First, a gas plant will last at least 40 years, a wind turbine, while advertising a 20-year life, data shows that it’s really more like 15 years. So, we will need to multiply the ratio by 3.5 times. So, this land-based wind turbine will not need 100 times more materials but 350 times more materials.

The increasingly popular offshore wind plants will normally use about 2-times more materials than their land-based counterparts. So, an offshore wind plant needs about 700 times more materials than a comparable gas plant.

Because wind is inherently intermittent and unreliable, these wind plants need to be backed 100% of the time and at 110% power by fast-responding jet engines like gas turbines. Then, because they must instantly make up for the power shortages when the sun is not shining very bright all the time (i.e., clouds) and the wind is not blowing appropriately all the time. So, there is a zero reduction in fossil fuels burned and zero reduction in CO2 production. Yes, these turbines burn as much fuel as if the wind turbines were not even there.

2

Isn’t this the very definition of insanity? With all the costs, all of the materials, and all the fossil fuels burned, in a misguided effort to reduce CO2 production, we end up with no decrease in CO2 production.

Now, here’s a kick in the ass. CO2 does not cause global warming. Read this article for a comprehensive explanation using high school-level science. https://www.academia.edu/76652255/Revised_Why_cant_CO2_and_greenhouse_eff ect_cause_global_warming And the final kick in the ass is an article that explains the wasted materials, costs, and environmental damage caused by wind and solar plants. https://www.academia.edu/106878574/The_green_delusion_of_solar_and_wind

3