RE: The world's population should be at most 50 million.
October 10, 2018 at 12:05 pm
(This post was last modified: October 10, 2018 at 12:05 pm by Alan V.)
(October 10, 2018 at 11:43 am)Khemikal Wrote: You shouldn't need to look it up, though, because it should be obvious that tractors and chemicals are doing work that will still need to be done when we remove those tractors and chemicals from the picture. If we didn't go with some alternative or novel approach, and we wanted to keep growing in the fields....all of that petro-labor will have to be added to the total labor cost of the acre in human or "other" hours...otherwise, the result is yield loss.
Your solution may be the best way to deal with climate refugees. However, from what I have read, trucking and farming will likely be powered by biofuels from algae or whatever. There will be some transition, which may be quite abrupt the longer we put off adapting to the coming realities, but it will likely mean a number of transitional compromises until we reach some stable system again. And who knows how much farmland the U.S. will lose with the "dustbowlification" of the western states caused by climate change, which is likely this century in a business-as-usual scenario.
Which is why population still needs to come down as well.
