Showing posts with label deforestation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label deforestation. Show all posts

Monday, July 27, 2015

Global population and energy use


Study is first to quantify global population
growth compared to energy use

Ending 400-year trend, global population growth has begun
to catch up with energy consumption during past 50 years.

If you've lived between the year 1560 and the present day, more power to you. Literally.

As global population grew from about 500 million in 1560 to more than 7 billion, energy usage outpaced population growth. This in effect increased the world's carrying capacity and allowed population to grow exponentially. Since 1963, however, the ratio between energy increases and population growth has narrowed. This change could restrict future population growth.

That's one of several conclusions reached by University of Nebraska-Lincoln ecologist John DeLong, who has co-authored the first study to quantify the relationship between human population growth and energy use on an international scale.

The study compiled several centuries' worth of data from Great Britain, the United States and Sweden to profile the dynamics between a skyrocketing population and its consumption of energy from fossil fuels and renewable sources.

The data showed that energy use has generally outpaced population growth over the last few hundred years. Each generation has thus produced more energy per person than its predecessor, the study reported, even as the population has climbed from about 500 million to more than 7 billion in the 450 years analyzed by the authors.

We Have to Change:
Taking Action to
Stabilize Climate Change,
 Curb Population Growth
 Including Immigration,
End Poverty, and the Liquidat


by Maria Ronay

Click to order from
Powell's Books
This increasing per capita energy supply has also hiked up Earth's carrying capacity -- the number of people it can sustain at equilibrium -- and allowed the population to grow at an ever-faster, or exponential, rate.

"Broadly speaking, no one's really (quantified) this," said DeLong, assistant professor of biological sciences. "But it was important, because there are studies going back decades that assume this kind of positive feedback loop: We grow, we expand our capacity to extract energy, and then we grow some more."

However, DeLong and colleague Oskar Burger also found that this dynamic has shifted in the decades following 1963, when the world's population was growing faster than ever before or since.

During the subsequent half-century, the ratio between energy increases and population growth has narrowed, with the former now aligning more closely to the latter. A 1:1 ratio would theoretically limit the planet's population to a linear rather than exponential growth rate.

"I do think this should challenge our assumptions about future population growth," DeLong said. "The study supports conventional wisdom to a degree, but it also reminds us that (abundant energy) is maybe not something that we can count on indefinitely.

"Our study sort of plays into a deep cultural philosophy that we have the creativity and ability to solve whatever problem comes our way. The evidence shows that, from an energy point of view, we've done that a lot. But maybe that's not a guarantee."

While analyzing the data, the researchers also spotted unexpected fluctuations in the population-energy relationship at certain points in history. After closer scrutiny, they discovered that per capita energy yields fluctuated during times of socio-economic and environmental upheaval: the Little Ice Age, the Industrial Revolution, World War I and II, the oil crises of the 1970s.

Though DeLong emphasized that the data will not allow researchers to determine whether this instability actually drove changes in energy use -- or vice versa -- he acknowledged that the overlaps warrant further study.

"It's a cautionary tale, perhaps," DeLong said. "The human socio-economic system is a complex one with a lot of moving parts. Those things are really unpredictable, but generally speaking, we think about complex systems as relying on a stable throughput of energy.

"I think the timing of those peaks in variability tells us that we should be thinking about this in two ways: how what other countries do influences the energy supply, and how to maintain those flows without generating downstream problems."

DeLong said the study's insights might also help inform and refine population projections. The United Nations currently projects, with 95 percent confidence, that Earth's population in the year 2100 will sit between 9 billion and 13 billion people.

"In the back of our minds, it definitely is a goal to make better, more mechanistic forecasts," said DeLong. "What we're saying is: Every other population on the planet depends on energy to fuel their activities and maintain their bodies. Ours must, too."

Related stories:
Story Source: Materials provided by University of Nebraska-Lincoln.  John P. DeLong, Oskar Burger. Socio-Economic Instability and the Scaling of Energy Use with Population Size. PLOS ONE, 2015

Wednesday, July 22, 2015

THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT


Our planet is a tremendously complex set of systems that is very confusing to the average citizen.  To make it simpler to understand the current state of the overall global environment, posts about the latest science found on reputable sites are listed below for each of the nine planetary systems identified in 2010 by the Stockholm Resilience Centre. 

After each category title is a brief explanation of the system as written by the Stockholm Centre.  The stories posted are based on hard, vetted science - not someone's personal opinion.  To be considered vetted, the story is evaluated by qualified scientists to ensure that correct scientific procedures have been followed and that all and any data is included whether or not it supports the study's conclusions.

The systems that scientists agree have deteriorated to or beyond a practical tipping point based on the latest science are highlighted in red.  

      The Sixth Extinction:
      An Unnatural History
      by Elizabeth Kolbert
      Click to order
    • Change in biosphere integrity (biodiversity loss and species extinction)
  • Biogeochemical flows (phosphorus and nitrogen cycles)
    • The biogeochemical cycles of nitrogen and phosphorus have been radically changed by humans as a result of many industrial and agricultural processes. Nitrogen and phosphorus are both essential elements for plant growth, so fertilizer production and application is the main concern. Much of this new reactive nitrogen is emitted to the atmosphere in various forms rather than taken up by crops. When it is rained out, it pollutes waterways and coastal zones or accumulates in the terrestrial biosphere. Similarly, a relatively small proportion of phosphorus fertilizers applied to food production systems is taken up by plants; much of the phosphorus mobilized by humans also ends up in aquatic systems. These can become oxygen-starved as bacteria consume the blooms of algae that grow in response to the high nutrient supply. A significant fraction of the applied nitrogen and phosphorus makes its way to the sea, and can push marine and aquatic systems across ecological thresholds of their own.  One regional-scale example of this effect is the decline in the shrimp catch in the Gulf of Mexico's 'dead zone' caused by fertilizer transported in rivers from the US Midwest.
  • Atmospheric aerosol loading (microscopic particles in the atmosphere that affect climate and living organisms)
    • An atmospheric aerosol planetary boundary was proposed primarily because of the influence of aerosols on Earth's climate system. 
      • Aerosols play a critically important role in the hydrological cycle affecting cloud formation and global-scale and regional patterns of atmospheric circulation, such as the monsoon systems in tropical regions.
      • Aerosols have a direct effect on climate, by changing how much solar radiation is reflected or absorbed in the atmosphere. Shifts in climate regimes and monsoon systems have already been seen in highly polluted environments, giving a quantifiable regional measure for an aerosol boundary. 
      • Aerosols have adverse effects on many living organisms. Inhaling highly polluted air causes roughly 800,000 people to die prematurely each year. 
      • No limits to human effects on clouds
      • Climate change scientists must turn their attention to clean skies, experts urge
  • Introduction of novel entities (e.g. organic pollutants, radioactive materials, nanomaterials, and micro-plastics). 
    • Emissions of toxic and long-lived substances such as synthetic organic pollutants, heavy metal compounds and radioactive materials represent some of the key human-driven changes to the planetary environment. These compounds can have potentially irreversible effects on living organisms and on the physical environment. Even when the uptake and bioaccumulation of chemical pollution is at sub-lethal levels for organisms, the effects of reduced fertility and the potential of permanent genetic damage can have severe effects on ecosystems far removed from the source of the pollution. For example, persistent organic compounds have caused dramatic reductions in bird populations and impaired reproduction and development in marine mammals.