GOOD

Can the World Feed 10 Billion People?

Our kids will be living with 10 billion in 2100. Will they be eating anything?

The world population will hit 10 billion by 2100. That's what the United Nations says in its latest estimate.


Is this finally the "population bomb" that will end the world as we know it, as Paul Ehrlich wrongly predicted in 1968? Or can we really feed this many people—even with sustainable agriculture?

Well, there are promising signs that we will be able to feed a growing world. Earlier this year, two French research organizations released Agrimonde, a report detailing two possible scenarios for feeding 9 billion over the next five decades. One model emphasized economic growth over the environment and required an estimated 80 percent growth in farm productivity. The other emphasized an agro-ecological system, requiring a 30 percent growth in agricultural productivity. What both models had in common: They used a global average of 3,000 calories per person per day.

Three thousand calories is well below our current consumption in the United States (and other blue regions in the map below). In other words, we can feed the world if you stop eating so many steaks, snacks, and sodas.

What complicates these projections is the methods we use for measuring global food production—maximum yields, arable land, and per capita energy intake. All these variables are complex and highly subjective, so the deep structure of debate about feeding the world comes down to data.

Historian Warren Belasco argues in A History of the Future of Food that hunger is newsworthy only when it's countable, so the recurring debates—biotechnology versus agroecology—have really been battles over which data the sages and oracles use to predict the future of food. Ending hunger is more than just redistributing calories, Belasco says. It's about questioning the underlying assumption involved with concentrating calories into profitable and wasteful products.

In short, calculations of the total food supply require a comprehensive audit of the global food chain. Production of calories is only the start.

\n

Furthermore, the 3,000-calories-a-day solution comes with cultural assumptions. Think about a school lunch. Chances are it's made with wheat and corn. And we generally give kids liquid milk instead of cultured yogurts. Those choices aren't universal.

Until we answer the more qualitative questions—how many people do we feed for how long, with what technology, and with what kind of stability—any population estimates will continue fostering competing visions by the world's cornucopianists or Malthusian catastrophists.

Photo (cc) by NASA Goddard Photo and Video; map via Chartbins

Articles
via David Leavitt / Twitter

Anyone who has ever worked in retail knows that the worst thing about the job, right after the pay, are the unreasonable cheapskates who "want to talk to your manager" to get some money off an item.

They think that throwing a tantrum will save them a few bucks and don't care if they completely embarrass themselves in the process. Sometimes that involves belittling the poor employee who's just trying to get through their day with an ounce of dignity.

Twitter is rallying around a gal named Tori who works at a Target in Massachusetts after she was tweet-shamed by irate chapekate, journalist, and Twitter troll, David Leavitt.

Keep Reading
Business

Childbirth is the number one reason American women visit the hospital, and it ain't cheap. In fact, it's getting more and more expensive. A new study published in Health Affairs found that the cost of having a baby with employer-sponsored health insurance increased by almost 50% in the past seven years.

The study evaluated "trends in cost-sharing for maternity care for women with employer-based health insurance plans, before and after the Affordable Care Act," which was signed into law in 2010. The study looked at over 657,061 women enrolled in large employer-sponsored health insurance plans who delivered babies between 2008 and 2015, as these plans tend to cover more than plans purchased by small businesses or individuals.

Keep Reading
Health

A meteorite crashed into Earth nearly 800,000 years ago. The meteor was 1.2 miles wide, and the impact was so big, it covered 10% of the planet with debris. However, scientists haven't been able to find the impact site for over a century. That is, until now. A study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences journal believes the crash site has been located.

Tektites, which are essentially rocks that have been liquefied from the heat of the impact and then cooled to form glass, help scientists spot the original impact site of a meteor. Upon impact, melted material is thrown into the atmosphere, then falls back to the ground. Even if the original crater has disappeared due to erosion or is hidden by a shift in tectonic plates, tektites give the spot away. Tektites between 750,000 to 35.5 million years old have been found in every continent except Antarctica.

Keep Reading