Tuesday, April 23, 2024
Contact    |    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon  
Unexplained Mysteries
You are viewing: Home > News > Science & Technology > News story
Welcome Guest ( Login or Register )  
All ▾
Search Submit

Science & Technology

World's population to reach 11bn by 2100

By T.K. Randall
September 19, 2014 · Comment icon 76 comments

There are no indications that population growth is slowing down. Image Credit: CC BY 2.0 Guillaume
New predictions suggest that the population will rise by another 4 billion by the end of the century.
The study, which was conducted by an international team of experts, used new techniques and statistics to provide an accurate prediction of future population growth across the globe.

The groundbreaking results are in contrast to previous estimates that suggested the population would peak at 9bn in 2050.

There is now a 70% chance that by the beginning of the 22nd century the world's population could have risen to 11 billion.
"The previous projections said this problem was going to go away so it took the focus off the population issue," said Prof Adrian Raftery. "There is now a strong argument that population should return to the top of the international agenda. Population is the driver of just about everything else and rapid population growth can exacerbate all kinds of challenges."

Some of those challenges include food and water shortages, healthcare, housing and pollution.

Much of the growth is expected to occur in Sub-saharan Africa where the population is expected to rise by at least 2.5 billion before the century is out.

Source: The Guardian | Comments (76)




Other news and articles
Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #67 Posted by Frank Merton 10 years ago
Your effort to equate late-term abortions with terrorist atrocities to living people is counterproductive, and only makes people who are not ideologues and think rationally angry.
Comment icon #68 Posted by Frank Merton 10 years ago
As with Oil, the US has nothing to fear regarding food. We can probably feed three times as many people as we having living here now. It is the overcrowded populations living in untenable locations in large numbers that are hard to feed. I saw a report the other day that the amount of US crops this year will likely be 15% higher then the average. Which the farmers are complaining about because it probably will drive prices down. The environmentalist movement is good in itself and should not use scare tactics. That just makes it seem like chicken-little or the boy who cried wolf.I think a stabl... [More]
Comment icon #69 Posted by Doug1029 10 years ago
Your effort to equate late-term abortions with terrorist atrocities to living people is counterproductive, and only makes people who are not ideologues and think rationally angry. How did we get onto abortion, anyway? I was trying to show that denial of health care coverage kills people and is thus, as morally reprehensible as deliberate murder. The difference is omission vs. commission. Let's return this thread to over-population. Doug
Comment icon #70 Posted by Doug1029 10 years ago
As with Oil, the US has nothing to fear regarding food. We can probably feed three times as many people as we having living here now. It is the overcrowded populations living in untenable locations in large numbers that are hard to feed. It is not actually named "The Farm Bill." It is called "The Food Security Act." It's about guaranteeing adequate food supplies in the US and not about helping farmers. I saw a report the other day that the amount of US crops this year will likely be 15% higher then the average. Which the farmers are complaining about because it probably will drive prices down.... [More]
Comment icon #71 Posted by DieChecker 10 years ago
Your effort to equate late-term abortions with terrorist atrocities to living people is counterproductive, and only makes people who are not ideologues and think rationally angry. I'm OK with that, and will gladly stop, if we can all agree that comparing the Republicans to atrocity terrorists, and comparing those who favor the death penalty to terrorists, stops also. Otherwise fighting ideologue talk with ideologue talk sees to be the rule of the day. (In best whining kid voice) He started it!!!
Comment icon #72 Posted by Doug1029 10 years ago
As with Oil, the US has nothing to fear regarding food. We can probably feed three times as many people as we having living here now. It is the overcrowded populations living in untenable locations in large numbers that are hard to feed. I was referring to the world in general. Humans are very close to having enough food to feed everybody a minimum-quality/quantity diet. There is room for some improvement in quality, though, and there are lots of people who could use a few more calories. The major problems are war, and like Frank said, bad government. Doug
Comment icon #73 Posted by Doug1029 10 years ago
That the world is running out of oil is something that might (might) happen in maybe fifty years. I would push and subsidize alternative energy for other reasons -- that it is cleaner and may help if global warming is a reality (and I think probably so). Actually, it's easy to tell when we're REALLY running out of something, that claims are not just scare tactics. Just watch the prices and the amounts being produced. If the price goes up, followed by production going up, we've still got plenty. If the price goes up, but production doesn't, we're running out. We will always have enough oil for ... [More]
Comment icon #74 Posted by Doug1029 10 years ago
The fundamental problem is over-population. One can easily see what happens in animal populations by studying the records of the Hudson's Bay Company (They go back to 1700.), especially the purchase of rabbit skins. Populations start low and increase exponentially for a time. As the habitat is degraded by too many mouths to feed, animals start eating the "principle" rather than the "interest." The "interest" is the part of the food plant that it can afford to lose without dying. The "principle" is the part of the plant that it needs to reproduce and survive. Once the principle is withdrawn, th... [More]
Comment icon #75 Posted by DieChecker 10 years ago
I was referring to the world in general. Humans are very close to having enough food to feed everybody a minimum-quality/quantity diet. There is room for some improvement in quality, though, and there are lots of people who could use a few more calories. The major problems are war, and like Frank said, bad government. Doug There is also transport and storage. If food cannot be transported to where the hungry people are, they will still remain hungry. For everyone to get fed would probably require a world government, otherwise individual nations will cause problems. It is like trying to create ... [More]
Comment icon #76 Posted by Doug1029 10 years ago
There is also transport and storage. If food cannot be transported to where the hungry people are, they will still remain hungry. For everyone to get fed would probably require a world government, otherwise individual nations will cause problems. It is like trying to create international universal healthcare. There a lot of foundation changes that would have to be made first in order for healthcare or food distribution on a global scale to be successful. All true. But not sufficient reason not to try. We are very close to feeding all the world's people now. A little extra effort could make the... [More]


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


Our new book is out now!
Book cover

The Unexplained Mysteries
Book of Weird News

 AVAILABLE NOW 

Take a walk on the weird side with this compilation of some of the weirdest stories ever to grace the pages of a newspaper.

Click here to learn more

We need your help!
Patreon logo

Support us on Patreon

 BONUS CONTENT 

For less than the cost of a cup of coffee, you can gain access to a wide range of exclusive perks including our popular 'Lost Ghost Stories' series.

Click here to learn more

Recent news and articles