Can Global Food Production Keep Up With Population Growth?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 окт 2024
- Build your online business with Shopify! Visit shopify.com/fr... and start your 90-day free trial today!
Can Global Food Production Keep Up With Population Growth? - Second Thought
SUBSCRIBE HERE: bit.ly/2nFsvTS
WATCH LAST VIDEO HERE: • Playlist
New video every Friday!
Follow Second Thought on Social Media!
Twitter: / _secondthought
Patreon: / secondthought
Watch More Second Thought:
Latest Uploads: • Playlist
Spaaaaaace!: • Playlist
What If...: • Playlist
Popular Videos: • Popular Videos | Secon...
About Second Thought:
Second Thought is a channel devoted to the things in life worth thinking about! Science, history, politics, religion...basically everything you're not supposed to talk about at the dinner table. Welcome!
Business Email: secondthoughtchannel@gmail.com
I have been planting Fruit Trees around Orlando. My goal is to plant 50 Trees in 2020. I am currently at 32/50 trees planted. Almost there :)
Update: 41/50 Trees are now planted as of 5/27/2020
If you are reading this i challange you to plant just 10 trees in 2020. Leave a like if you accept my Challenge!
Where in Orlando?
Is Banana tree count
@@somerandomuser5155 Yes, take care to let it grow as big as you can let it. Good job.
I applaud you
Food waste is Humanity's dumbest problem
Bryan Comlor no it’s about food that hasn’t been eaten but not enough people buy it
Not accepting Jesus and what he did for them on the cross is humanities dumbest problem. People have literally been engaging in war, genocide, racism, terrorism, abuse of power, rape, thievery and many other things for thousands of years. This world is still struggling with the SAME exact issues that it had 2,000 years ago. War still exists. Sex trafficking still exists. Corrupt governments still exist. Mankind has continued to do wrong for THOUSANDS of years. Don't have faith that humanity will EVER come to an actual solution for any of the problems listed above. They clearly cant do anything by themselves. If you want faith in something, it should be in Jesus and the sacrifice that he made for your sins so that you could be forgiven and saved from hell. The only hope that this world has is Jesus. The only thing I have faith in is that the rapture is about to happen and I'll be rescued from all of this craziness. Millions of Christians and children are going to be taken one day very soon, to save them from what's about to happen. If you confess that you're a sinner and believe in your heart that Jesus died and rose for your sins so that you could be forgiven and saved from hell because of your sinful nature, you'll be saved and raptured when the time comes. Jesus lived a perfect and sinless life. He took YOUR sin upon himself and died in your place as punishment. He then rose three days later because sin and death were defeated through his sacrifice. Simply believe in what he did for you and you WILL be saved
@@funveeable Making sure you don't waste food is good idea, but having to resort to eating all the crumbs as well would be sad. I bet even you yourself don't do that.
Would love to see slightly longer videos to go into more depth, 12 mins or so
I also wish he would give some sources for his estimates and models.
@@Sara3346 world Bank,hunger index.
When it comes to everything from food to carbon emissions; We don't have an over population problem. We have an over consumption problem.
There is no 'we'.
@Just an alien with some internet access Damn extraterrestial being does your mean of interstellar transport even support their weight?
@@empathyrebel There definitely is a "we"
Overpopulation is not an issue if only current number of people is taken into account, but it should be number plus growth rate. We would not have an overpopulation problem if number of people was the same, but growth rate was 5 times smaller.
Also, it is not simply overconsumption, it is economic inequality! That is the main problem!
And if you value wild ecosystems and over species and biodiversity, you may actually see, that even if we eradicated overconsumption and inequality totally (which I doubt is possible), and if population growth was zero, then with current number of people and current technology we would still damage wild nature a lot, simply in order to feed and give comfortable life to everyone. I don't know about you, but for me it is unacceptable.
I'm sorry but we have both. While yes we can easily feed everyone on Earth currently it is at a massive expense to the environment. Current farming and land use methods are destroying the land. "sustainably" feeding the population fundamentally isn't possible at such an absurdly large population.
So, they just throwing tons of food into dumpsters? wtf?
never worked for walmart's produce department huh?
Because a lot of it spoils quite quickly, despite possible use elsewhete
Food that isn't perfect, sadly, won't be bought by consumers. If a potato doesn't have the perfect shape, it get's thrown away.
@@salokin3087 There's tons of non spoiled food thrown out with more than plenty shelf life to go to people in need. But using it cuts into profits.
Welcome to realizing that world poverty and hunger is a choice we make, by prioritizing profits over lives.
I can imagine you made this video after watching that Michael Moore's documentary, Planet of the Humans. I still can not believe someone with an academy award can produce such a highly misleading film targeting the green technology and all the efforts that have been put towards a renewable future and blaming it all on overpopulation without offering any way forward. I am absolutely loving your last few videos, keep them coming :)
Same
How many of those green industries that Obama gave billions to are still in business?
A: none
Sucker Free ... how many fossil fuel companies need constant propping up to remain in business? Trump's witless promise of coal jobs in the face of mechanization and falling demand. All fossil fuel extraction operations that have been allowed to walk away from their clean-up jobs.
Well blaming it all on overpopulation isnt quite right. Blaming it on human greed is more appropriate. The planet can hold on so much human greed. We havent even colonized any other hospitable planet yet. We can come up with as many "solutions" like green enegy and so on but that will never get to the core of the problem. More humans,more greed. Planet of the Humans was about raising awareness that things are not as simple as one might think. Its up to us to make a way "forward" as individuals. Because only individuals can bring about change.
Agreed! Industrial agriculture is FUUUUUUCKED. DEEPLY destructive. Regenerative agriculture is the ticket! Permaculture, silvopasture, rotational grazing... he missed the mark BIG TIME by not repping these practices as the viable solutions they are. 😞
Im from the US and I used to work at a big family restaurant chain in college. back in the 90s they used to donate all the leftover foods from the buffet at the end of each day and would donate unused foods as well. Then everyone became sue happy. People would get sick, blame it on the food, and the restaurant would become liable. This happened several times in the late 90s from my location alone and the payouts from food poisoning cases were to high so they stopped the donation program. People that have never worked in a restaurant do not realize how much food restaurants waste each day, it’s unreal
There's laws in place for a while now that protect good faith donations from being subject to lawsuits.
@@RiamsWorld In some states but not all.
Your story there reminded of the Casino Food Recycler job from the TV show Dirty Jobs.
Great video, Keep up doing these eye opening content.
Well, we currently waste 1/3 of all food in the world and the vast majority of humans do not experience hunger. the only reason it is still around is distribution and logistics problems. and it's pretty likely we will create new solutions to increase food production. for example, genetic manipulation could allow us to pack more nutrients into plants, make them easier to grow, and all other kinds of helpful stuff. i don't think it will be that big of a problem in the future, unless climate change reduces the amount of arable land, but in these cases i would expect new sources of food to become popular, like algae food. or, if hydroponics become cheaper, we could start using that to offset the loss of arable land.
We poison our soil on the daily and small farmers are being run out of their businesses. Monsanto is an evil machine that stops development and proper distribution.
@@flytrapYTP What do you mean by "Monsanto"?
@Starvin Marvin The problem is that most of the world's poor live in undeveloped or developing countries, where conflict is common. If these places were stable, distribution would be much less of a problem. Our world can support a very large population, much larger than today's world population. the problem is inefficient use of land. the main contributor to this inefficiency are imaginary lines between nations we call borders.
if people start starving all over the place, i don't think hydroponics would need to get cheaper, all we'd need is to build those "farms", and considering the industrial capacity of the modern world wouldn't take too long if made a priority.
@@davineves8529 I meant as in used enough to start replacing traditional food growing.
Arable land is vanishing at a rapid rate, some of the statistics coming out are actually pretty scary in terms of where we will be in the near future. The problem is intensive farming can only go on for so long before the soil becomes 'dead', it doesn't enable the land to replenish and this exacerbates issues generated by climate change. Coupled with terrible environmental practices in some countries (here in the U.K we destroyed a lot of riverside flora/woodland, which A, makes flooding more likely and B when it does flood washes the nutrients in the soil away) means things are pretty bleak.
Worse still we're accelerating this practice because we destroy what remaining wilderness is left to grow more food in the wake of current land becoming infertile. Now you can reverse the process and make land fertile again, but this doesn't feed into the current capitalist model of throw-away cheap food culture, because making soil fertile again takes time and diligence with little hope for short term profits (whereas bulldozing forests or natural spaces is cheap as chips).
There is not likely to be any 'breakthrough' in the near future either. Hydroponics is energy intensive and requires excellent quality infrastructure, so it won't become the 'norm' any time soon. There is also the added issue that food produced in hydroponics lacks enough nutrients. No action is being taken on climate change and only small scale 'hobbyists' are taking on land revitalization.
Call me a pessimist but the video is too optimistic in areas. Can we support a population of 10 Billion +? Maybe, but not properly or securely whilst keeping ourselves and our world in decent health, at least not without revolutionary change in how we live, eat and work etc. The world is heading towards a period where various crises will strike all at once that may even cause a population drop. My hope is we will come out of it all a more mature and intelligent species, but those of us here now will be in the history books by then.
Have you heard of the Knepp Estate and what they are doing?
It hurts to see companies throwing out perfectly good food cause they can't make a profit from distributing it... They KNOW people are starving. Its pure greed :(
it's illegal to give away leftover food from a restaurant, it's legal to give food away if it's during business hours, but dumb laws say you can't just give extras away after the day is over, i used to take lots of food home from the restaurant i used to work at, didn't even go to HEB anymore since i had a bunch of restaurant food in my fridge constantly.
ä
@@humancivilisationwasamista6293 username checks out,
Kapitalism Go!
Damn, I didnt know there were laws about it. I understand if theres a contamination risk, but with things in supermarkets that are packaged and not gone bad, is it still illegal? It just hurts seeing all the food in the bin, because if it was good to eat, who's gonna be able to eat it now? And if someone needs food from the bins then theyre more likely to get ill, even if they just made a container thats clean and used for food thats still good before it gets to the stage of being thrown out where people could go if they need it and have less risk of getting ill. I don't know how it all works, I just wish there was a way we could get food people dont buy to the people who need it
Im glad that you discussed the terrible beef/meat industry.
People usually tend to ignore that information because it usually comes from the mouth of a vegan calling them monsters.
Much respect.
Hi, I feel like the problem of overpopulation isn’t as much about food production as it is about other global problems. A lot of current global issues can be if not solved than at least made less troubling by lowering the number of people. For example water shortage and carbon dioxide emissions. Of course it is important to keep in mind that every industrialization comes with population boom but we should not grow our population more than we need to. To live environmentally friendly is generaly just easier with less people.
Over all I agree with everything said in the video.
It's not so much the population as how we choose to live. For instance, American urban planning is a dumpster fire. People in many cities have no choice but to sit in their cars for hour or two each day, many who commute alone. If we planned cities so that people could walk to go most places, that would put a dent in emissions. And that's only one of thousands of ways we could optimize how we live. Our system just doesn't incentivize those choices most of the time. Also, when you talk about restricting population, it can veer into eugenics really quickly
Things get beyond dicey and inhuman for population control. Ultimately, there are far better brand humane solutions to these problems that are not as simple but far simpler than our convoluted solutions we have today that only serve to keep masses' resources under the control of people who want to have control over the masses.
@@brandonwilliams3788 I totally agree. From my perspective if we say that our population will reach 10 billion than I want to know why. I don’t support any restrictions concerning population growth. If there is no reason for population growth other than we just can support it we are putting unnecessary pressure on our climate and infrastructure.
Ironicly, one possible solution might be education. With rising educational standards, population growth deminishes. And we need education anyway.
The big problem with overpopulation is that, first world countries massibely outconsume and outwaste people in third world countries, to the point where hundreds of those poor emit as much carbon dioxide, or use water as a single average US or EU citizen. But the discussion is always aimed at wanting to prevent those poor people from breeding.
Also western countries actually need those poor people to stay poor, to keep capitalism up. Just imagine if clothes were made by workers paid $14 an hour instead of $0.05. The US and Chinese government and many multinational corporations regularly take actions to destabilize these poor countries to keep them from becoming inexploitable.
Tbh people should thank the farmers more.
They do some of the most tiring jobs and work for hours and yet I see no one thank them.
They should be respected for providing food for everyone.
They are heroes without capes if you ask me.
We can t feed alot of poor currently
Matija Erdeljic not for lack of food though, just the failings of the system
how about you pay your road taxes instead of abusing the Farm Truck plate and constantly being on public roads instead.
Really ? ,its just another shit job that you do what your told to get your grants ,subsidies . Only recently in uk have they enforced slurry pits to stop the decimation of local streams and the silage process effectively hoovers all fields leaving nothing . Farmers are no different to anyone else and industrial meat farming threatens us all.
When farmers stop destroying produce for the sake of their bottom line, I'll thank them more. Until then, I'll just grow my own food.
You're making people think, "RUclips" gonna demonetize this vid or take it down...
Comrade Second Thought strikes again, advocating for mutual aid!
Permaculture is the future of food production. Food forest right at home that will provide 80% of our food needs. Not only does this save you money, it's saves our economy money because there are no transportation costs. These low maintenance systems can provide more food than any one family can each, which allows you to share with neighbors. The water harvesting designs in permaculture will slow down the runoff and let it sink into the soil near producing plants instead of becoming flood water. Through these systems we create biological diversity which is makes for more sustainable and healthier ecosystems. Permaculture has also been proven to reverse desertification all over the world.
If anyone is interested, give "Permaculture" a search. You won't be disappointed. (I recommend Geoff Lawton - Greening the Desert Project)
PaleGhost69
I've seen a few of those greening the deserts ideas now. Now that is particularly interesting is liquid nano clay. It's a special liquid clay mix that can be sprayed onto sand to turn it into productive soil. It was designed to try and bring life to Saudi Arabia's lifeless deserts. This stuff combined with some of the other methods floating around could turn every hot sandy desert in the world into productive land. Though of course we would have to consider how this would impact global climate, because otherwise we could be shooting ourselves in the foot.
You say it would save the economy money, but I think it would cost money, since the agricultural economy would collapse
Not everyone wants to spend their free time gardening. There are ways that our agricultural sector can change that benefit both the planet and the people. Permaculture just shoves responsibility to the individual and there is an extreme lack of quality control making disease a larger problem than it was before.
Yes it can, just stop wasting food and we won't even have to increase food production
Most of the waste is a lack of storage and speed to distribute produce
SinBae also, vegan food causes less food waste and takes less land to be produced
@@Axel-qz2rj How does it cause less food waste?
@@fgp0032 My only guess is that theirs less shit on fruits and vegetables that Americans arent willing to eat. Like with cows the scrape of huge chunks of meat simply because they sound gross or dont taste quite as good, but with fruits and vegetables you eat basically all the edible beats with very little left behind.
I dont actually know if any of what I said is true, but it sounds right
@@bombocrusty4251 Wtf are you talking about? There are millions of Americans who don't eat either of those things at all.
Yes, there is enough food. But simply not anyone can afford it. Solvent demand is satisfied. Hunger isn't.
Capitalism
Also the fact that factory farming is sadly a thing and humanity grew with it.
@HumanCivilisationwasamistake Xx Poor countries dont have capitalism. Thats literally why the people are starving. Tell me in which first world capitalist country people are starving?
@@theendurance Nice, just change the definition of word until they fit your narrative.
@@theendurance lol what do those countries have then? Tell us
How dare you?? How dare you make such compelling and thoughtful videos that educate people? You are upsetting the established order of tyranny and greed!
@@pingwingugu5 exactly and giving away free food doesn't solve the problem because people will still take the food and produce waste. All while starving people not near to the shop can't get the food
Vertical and indoor farming has been proving more efficient. Cutting distance by being closer to cities and taking less space. More effective for less water use and will have some level of protection from climate change.
Lol hadn't gotten to the part where it showed aerofarms and other vertical farms. Nice! That's from New Jersey in the US.
I’m what you would call a moderate conservative, and I really agree that even if it is somewhat inefficient to transport surpluses, we should transport it because it just makes sense..
Don’t be wasteful.
Agreed
The vast majority of our soy, rice and gain goes to feeding animal agriculture. It's really time we all majorly reduced out meat and animal product consumption and eat a diet that mostly consists of plants. Better for our health, the environment and of course the animals.
Yep
My first though was: Oh, here we go again with more depopulation propaganda.
Glad I actually stayed and watched 👍
Yes. Let's keep increasing our population. The bigger our population, the better.
@@afriedrich1452 that is not what op is implying
@@perhaps1094 lol that is EXACTLY what the video and the op are implying.
War leads to poverty. Poverty leads to hunger. Hunger...leads to the dark side.
You are a genius thank you for making content man
As someone whos palette detests vegetables and most fruit I've been super conscious of the type of meat I eat, I rarely eat mostly chicken and fish, I only eat beef when I have tacos which isn't very frequent.
We throw away and or store so much food because corporations who control the food find that more profitable than simply distributing food to people who need it. Our biggest problem is the profit above everything economic system AKA Capitalism
There's plenty of ways to grow enough food, if you think green. Rooftop gardens, community gardens in abandoned lots, fruit trees in public parks.
You can find ways to have a garden, even in an apartment complex. If you have a balcony, you can space plan to make the most of such a small space. You can also grow things in wi dow boxes and planters around the edge of your house. If you have a trellis outside of windows (like many did in the 80s), you can have climbing bushes/plants such as tomatoes and blackberries.
Plant some pecan trees in your backyard. Those give excellent shade and free pecans for decades. Pecans at the store are super expensive. My great grandparents had a few pecan trees and those things were huge! There were always pecans on the ground, and the branches are strong enough to hold a swing!
2:59
“The spread of disease”
*Shows mosquito*
*_HOLD UP_*
Were you not aware that mosquitoes can spread disease?
Don’t even need to watch to know.
Yes, of course it can.
People just need to be smart about how they do things.
@Starvin Marvin You would have said the same thing if you were from the medieval times and someone described modern society to you.
@Starvin Marvin Keep telling yourself that.
@Starvin Marvin money is a construct, we can literally print more, we have factories, roads and farms, that is the important link, we can build vertical farms using the productive capacity of modern industry to supply hundreds of billions, money is just a manner of distribution.
@@georgsgrants9925 WELL, he ain't exactly wrong. If we fixed poverty in an instant tomorrow, Inflation would skyrocket and In a globally connected market the purchasing power of the biggest part of the population (like 90%) would instantly plummit into the poverty line
Can't have everyones needs met, if our system is build upon one group of people owning something that the others dont have.
So ya, as long as there is money, as we use it, there will be poverty.
I’m only saying it CAN be done. Not saying it WILL be done. Greed is why many go without. It’s possible to have something of a utopia, but the nature of man will never allow it.
I’ll save you seven minutes. Yes, it can support population growth. The population is expected to level off at around 11 billion in 30 years. Overpopulation isn’t a threat, because birth rates naturally decrease.
@Starvin Marvin Not really. With future technology i can very well see it being possible to do.
@Starvin Marvin a hundret years ago it was also an utopia that europe would be free of internal war. two hundret years ago it was an utopia to heal a cough. This is really ignorant and short-sighted argumentation. There are solutions,there is nothing technical in our way,just our own disregard for human life not directly connected to us and our immense greed for profits.
Starvin Marvin
Not everyone gets fed, the point is that the population doesn’t outrun our capacity to grow food.
@Starvin Marvin Exactly. Food corporations produce much more food than is actually being sold in the market. Unless food cooperations either scale back the over-production or do the noble thing such as giving away excess products to places that can't afford them, then they're in for a shitshow
@Starvin Marvin Of course these issues weren't fully defeated but you are an absolute idiot if you think that the modern world is no better than the medieval one.
radical idea: no one should die homeless or starve to death, since we have enough food and houses to go around
so what if the homeless person is just someone who doesn't want to or isn't willing to or simply can't work? do they get all the stuff that they need for free?.... who pays for it? and would it really be fair to tell people who are paying for it that they should have to pay for others who aren't?
@@georgemendez6760 yes it is fair
@@deathpick2 so working 8 hours a day in order to pay for what you need is equal to someone else not working at all and getting it for free? you're definition of "fair" is clearly not accurate
@@georgemendez6760 this argument assumes that providing food to all that need it requires forced labour
@@deathpick2 if every farmer on earth stopped growing food right now and all the food on grocery shelves disappeared, what would you eat then?.... labor is still needed to grow food (YES, some of that labor has been automated) but it's not 100% ran by robots.... so that assumption is completely valid
At the current production rate it is possible to feed 150% of the current population.
"@Starvin Marvin" XD
@Starvin Marvin
www.elementascience.org/articles/10.1525/elementa.310/
It says we could feed almost 10 billing people which is roughly 150% of current population.
@Starvin Marvin corona
''Thomas Robert Malthus''
Can the population continue to grow infinitely ?? Is the earth surface and food supply infinite ???
for how long ????
"There's very little that the human race can't overcome"
Coronavairus reacted haha..
"You will own nothing and you'll be happy. You will eat less meat." ~Slogan from the World Economic Forum~
I'd say the vast majority of severe famine is caused exclusively by political conflicts and corruption. Venezuela for example
Let me say: building vertical farms is stupid as long as all outdoors fields aren't completely up to capacity
Greenhouses, water collection and recirculation, intelligent farming (minimizing fertilizers and pesticides), automating harvests
That's for plants, as of animals, they can produce energy dense calories out of poor soil where only weeds grow, and be used to recycle inedible parts of plants, while providing amazing fertilizer
You can also set up aquacultures, growing mussels and weeds
After you do all that, what should be relatively cheap, then you'll have reason to build vertical farms, as of food waste, promote/fund long shelf life products, like smoked meats and cheeses and dried products that does not need refrigeration in the first place
Y'all realise that South Africa (my country) it's sort of a big no no to waste food since there's such a high poverty rate. Like If u were to waste food everyone will look at you funny since there is probs a homeless guy sitting by the street that could probs really need that right about now
This video: *exists*
Me: “Ah, Malthus. We meet again.”
What a fine work this content is man, srlsy
this better be vegan propaganda
Just switching to a vegan diet doesn't address the full issue. Veganism has increased in the last decade by a lot and yet, more animals are bred into the system than ever before in recorded history. A lot of people who want to support non-meat farming give money to the industry unknowingly because plenty of companies who offer vegan products also do non-vegan, and those products are much more profitable. Plenty of non-meat farming is also unethical due to poisoning and overusing soil, fertilizer, and pesticides. A lot of people also simply cannot afford to go vegan due to economic status and living area. Just look at the US, poor people have 3x as much access to fast food, but much more difficulty accessing stores that actually offer healthy/vegan food.
It also doesn't help that certain parts of the vegan sphere are actively harming progress made by either elitism or association of veganism with other terrible movements & organizations. Simply put, yes, I may be able to go vegan, but I'm really fucking lucky to have that position.
Send hog
For developed countries: yes
For the rest of the world: no
We cannot have infinite growth on a finite planet.
@HaywireOfAlba No just educate all women and promote equality and family planning which will reduce the birth rate.
indoor farming solves basically every problem. you no longer need to transport everything accross the world since you can grow exotic fruits locally instead of importing them from NZ or africa. the water usage is over 10 times smaller. lab grown meat/plant based meat solves the other problem.
Ideas for more vertical farming in urban areas, & expansion of mutual aid programs are very good, but only if the entire world can tackle the ongoing health crisis, & become alot more compassionate & respectful of each other, instead of dreaming of rivals being nuked.
I would love the source used for that 40 billion carrying capacity figure...
Wait what about all other life on earth? Humans aren't the only things on the planet that need space and resources. If the world is supporting 40 billion humans, what would be left?
Sometimes we must put humanity first
@@JohnSmith-gz4fs humans would be nothing without the ecosystem.
@@JohnSmith-gz4fs sometimes? Majority of our time on this planet humans have always put humans first lol
It's not mutually exclusive. There are ideas and methods for humans to both rebuild ecosystems and provide enough food for billions of people. It just requires us to not consume as much per person. There are many, many things that I, as a westerner, enjoy that I could easily go without which would massively cut total human consumption. Not transporting fruits and vegetables across the planet all year round, I don't need strawberries in December for example, and instead, try and limit fresh food logistics by sourcing foods from closer regions. So if say France overproduces say tomatoes it can ship those anywhere in Europe but maybe it shouldn't ship them to China or Australia or the USA.
Another thing we can do is switch how we raise livestock. Instead of producing meat the way we do now, we can turn the large herds of cattle into ecological regenerative forces, larger herds of large mammals have existed on earth before we existed and they weren't the ecological disaster that modern meat factory farming is. THat's down to how we raise, feed, and manage livestock, not an intrinsic property of livestock. In fact, when used constructively livestock sequesters more carbon than it generates and it doesn't use up essential farmable land for fodder. Instead, livestock is herded in multispecies herds, on unfarmable land like perennial grassland (a rapidly diminishing ecosystem that requires large herbivores to function), the livestock is never given fodder, instead, it lives or dies on forage and grazing alone. This simulation (and it is a simulation it's managed) of natural process has proven to be both effective at raising livestock and effective at restoring ecological functions to the environment that sequester tons of carbon through soil reconstruction.
I don't think everyone concerned about the population is acting in bad faith; the earth can support 40,000,000,000 people, but how miserable would life be?
I know food will technically never be a problem. How I know?
The second biggest exporter of food, after the USA are the Netherlands. A small country with a population density.
Cultured meat and dairy should be considered in this video. Not to mention vertical farmings ability to be even in underground locations.
40 billion! The planet is dying from the waste and over fishing now! $) billion and no fuel!
Food is owned by corporate....
FU!
You want to wait until when to say that 'underpopulated' or not the world is mismanaged.
Even being 'underpopulated' as it is, people are already fight for resources.
FU!
I'm really liking your videos I only want to suggest for you to put sources for the information.
Could you please add references to your videos? I used to really like this channel, but I can't trust it unless you provide sources.
I'm actually gonna disagree with you on vertical farming and meat animals, although I wholeheartedly agree on redistribution mandates, cutting down on conspicuous consumption, etc. Unless we get actual good nuclear fusion, there is no relatively clean way I know to harness energy for vertical farms that will be more efficient than just using sunlight on fields, and space for agriculture isn't likely to become an issue any time soon.
Also, I admit I don't have a source for this, so please take this with a huge grain of salt, but as far as I know meat animals provide only about 4% of emissions, which we should definitely be worried about, but has to be weighed against the fact that meat animals often provide us with a way to grow craptons of food on land that would be hugely inconvenient (and emission heavy) to convert to crops with a similar nutritional output.
Not saying we shouldn't be worried about emissions from cattle, or switch to poultry, or fight against other meat industry practices like monopolization and animal cruelty. Just trying to add some extra nuance :)
Thanos: "I told you so!"
Avengers: "oh snap!"
To be fair most of the stuff in American grocery stores is NOT food
Im gonna go behind safeway and see if there's a dumpster full of food, if there is, then im putting it in boxes and then taking it to the homeless shelter!
but i dont have a car, so it will be harder to accomplish unfortunately.
Richer nations will continue to consume and live luxurious lives and the human race will allow people to continue to starve. Food production is working but distribution isn't... Plus people toss food.
it's impossible to have food for everyone. More poor country have food, more they makes kids = not enough food. The only way to fix starvation is with education.
Its not education, people usually have lots of children because child mortality is high. Education is important but it shouldnt come before medical supplies and food
Malthus: Hold my +ve checks
Right?
Not even one minute in and the well is already being poisoned. I guess I expected too much when I clicked on this video...
How to solve global food production problem : Shipping boys to boys together
The amount of food wastage is sad.
Wait but isn’t that socialism, I’ve been told socialism bad so, I won’t support the helping of the poor
You best be kidding
@Marek Tužák good then
This video seems to be cut short, as though it was produced to simply promote shopify.com. Just when it got the to the body of the idea and a hint of how to improve the situation, it suddenly says "hey, this product promotion is the real reason for this video. Everything else was just HD visual stimulation with a complimentary ear massage."
Such is RUclips I guess 😞
Big problem with food waste in the US is laws you can’t feed the homeless without somebody suing if they get sick so it is more financially viable to throw away the food and make sure nobody gets to it so that your company cannot be sued I deal with it daily
That's untrue. That's a lie that keeps being float around. It has never happened.
You don't deal with it daily, you liar. Show me one case.
@@Krystalmyth You were kind of a jerk there.
our earth is falling apart🥺😭
Here in Brazil we use 8% of our territory for agriculture , we have tons of land to grow up food , some nations want our natural resources and make a lot to take it from our farmers , like France , China and so on, no one know how rich ill be nations like Brazil !
Unfortunately like most countries the government in Brazil has signed an agreement with the UN and they will comply with it. See UN agenda 2021 and 2030
It sounds to me like the only objective to to see how many humans we can put on the earth. How about other creatures? Should they be allowed to survive or is it only humans that are important? How about climate disruption? Would the situation be as dire as it is now if we only had say 500 million humans on the earth as opposed to ~8 billion? The question is how sustainable is having more people?
I hate this Eurocentric attitude. Africa isn’t starving because we waste too much food, Africa is starving because the people there cannot afford food. And they cannot afford food because the western and eastern powers exploit them and leave them in peasant conditions. If the Africans actually owned their vast resources, they wouldn’t be starving.
Sustainable farming, chickens, vertical farms, are all fictitious panaceas to problems that you have little understanding of.
Africa will starve until they are free to choose their own destiny. You want to help Africa? Then get your mining and oil cartels the hell out. Stop trying to intervene in their wars. Stop sending mercenaries to shut down attempts at creating native industry.
Africa chooses a revolving door of warlords. Let them deal with it.
So who owns Africa's resources? Do they just let companies come in, see up shop and take things out of their country?
Your political videos are the best, even if we share some different pov
define food; other cultures consume it as delicacy others a taboo unappealing.
Great job. I just think a little context of soil conditions would be beneficial. The reason that lands that will transition to a more moderate climate will not be able to support large scale agriculture is because the soil in more equilateral has had epochs to mature. Also, the nutrients in a given area will decrease over time, especially with conventional monocrop farming practices, hence being able to support less of the population with the same land utilization.
Thanks for trying. Im afraid I’m no wiser after watching this video. A few graphs would have been helpful.
Please postulate for a political position. I and many many others will vote for you you have the voice that the people need.
What about regenerative agriculture? I don't understand why this concept goes under the radar so often...
awesome video, you are quickly becoming my favorite youtube channel, keep it up :)
Vertical farming is usable only for low caloric (practically negative caloric) food. Even calling it food in the sense of nutrition for large population is wrong as it is more like a food supplement in this context as greens are just source of fibre and micronutrients and provide zero or even negative metabolic energy.
Question, do you have a degree related to nutrition?
More humans = less diversity. Less diversity = a more fragile ecosystem. Have you read Daniel Quinn? Could be an eye opener . . .
Because more genetic options is gonna some how lead to less diversity
Automate transportation. Get drones to load up the food. When the marginal cost of transporting excess food to the needy drops low enough, no one will have enough justification to argue against it because of cost burden.
Just because food is grown, doesn't mean those who need it in order to live can afford it.
There’s too many restaurants and dumb food products.
Yes we havs enough food but the distribution and storage is the problem now .
Providing access to water will be more urgent despite rise in technology.
Study on the topic by the Food and Agriculture of the United Nations:
www.fao.org/global-perspectives-studies/resources/detail/en/c/1157074/
Planet population capacity is FAAAAAAAAAAR larger than 40bln.
Indeed. The earth's population capacity is only limited by our technology and efficiency in using it's land and resources.
This did not age well
As technology improves then the amount of people we can feed increases. Vertical farming, meat substitutes, removal of capitalism, adoption of a RESOURCE BASED ECONOMY.
Good luck growing maize soya and wheat in a vertical farm.
The earth transitions from glacial to interglacial back to glacial periods and so on. It is when the ice returns will we have a food problem
I kept talking about this. We're probably in more trouble than you realize. You sure you're statistics are correct? I know what I know too.
---------------
Many factors become a problem when people don't put it within themselves to handle upkeep properly. Besides food, war, pollution, and farming (which take for granted because it takes longer to produce food than people are alble to consume or throw away daily within a few minutes), theres also recycling. I know you haven't thought of all the factors, but I've thought of most of them. The population still needs to be controlled. There's a lot of people that don't take the consideration for "care" around the world to handle the things that need to be handled properly. And litering makes it no better when they take clean food, water, and resources for granted. People need to keep these things within themselves. Mining leads to sink holes and possible earthquakes. Keep polluting the oceans and the population will die quickly by killing our sea life and its food resources, which causes them to go to other regions they wouldn't normally in order to find food. The beginning of a successful future for all, is this idea alone:
Controlling one's self. Everything else will follow. You don't have respect for self or self respect, then you won't for anyone or anything else in this existence.
What about nature? Sure we can grow food all over, but if we destroy nature to make room for our farms, we will be hit much harder by draughts, floods, disease - and we destroy precious - priceless - genetic resources that could be useful some time in the future. We are currently expanding into rainforests, marshlands, rivers, coastal areas, lakes - with our activities... Nature is keeping us alive, giving us food, oxygen, shelter as well as peace of mind. These areas are shrinking by the minute. Imagine what will be left in 20 years, when the population might be 10-12 billion...
Yebb.
The Frauenhofer Institute(GER) a few years ago invented a algea(which only need a small seedto start a process, light, CO2 and plastic bags or glass tubes to grow in) that can be produced super easy, transportet grained and also super simple, and provides nearly all a human being needs as food(you even can put it into your meal of rice or something to make this more potent). It - for reasons i leave for debate - not wanted on the international carped.
As a lot of modern tech is now available, the same institute developed a modified fungus that exceeds the algea by far. It now not even needs light anymore and eats CO2. Granulated it makes a flour that is extremly potent as food source.
With this at hand - an in use - a unlimited basement of food is given. Pimped by artificially grown meat, and a number of artificial lipids and hormones(also designed by the Frauenhofer) you can have every taste, every shape and all in completly unharmed by sicknesses, stress, drugs or harmfull additionals in the product. Just in case you like to eat what you want - it's okay, there could be enough of everything with every taste.
We just need a global society that not decide to live in the medival times, but step in the future we could had have since one or two decades at last.
PS: As dark irony - even the NSDAP had some scientists who wanted to give power and food for every nation to make mankind better as a whole(with planned projects at hand). The pride this projects would have granted to Germany these days probably had even cured the sickest of the NSDAP members. Maybe.
We are definitely overpopulated if you account for the effect our numbers have on other species. Other species are not a mere luxury, they are cogs in the same ecosystem that produces our food, oxygen, and potable water.
Would it be too far out of line to suggest a two-child maximum policy for Americans? This isn't the 1800s anymore with a huge mortality rate and farms to manually tend to (with plows and horses) so there's _no reason_ at all to have 10 children. 'tis a crying shame to know how much the USA dumps. Some companies will donate or reduce prices on products set to expire but not where I work. They'd rather dump it instead of taking a dollar or two off sticker price, essentially throwing money in the trash. =\
Yes, but with half the population we'd still have oil reserves, half the co2 and so on. These arguments against overpopulation that equate to "we're not starving or exploding this minute, breed more." is short sighted. Imagine if instead of stabilizing the world's population dropped off. Now imagine they'd never cut those trees, used that fuel, had those kids.
Why advocate for abandoning healthy cow/grazer meat instead of reform to go back to sustainable husbandry?
Yeah, pasture-raised cow require some land, but it fails to mention it's land not usable for farming. Water comes from the sky. Food comes from grass and the near nature grows better with grazers on it than without, in many regions grazers are consciously introduced to poorly growing nature to make it flourish. It's sustainable, unlike monocrops.
What is point of this video? We know already US right now is overproduction destroying that overproduction already I second thought why I subbed.
HEMP. HEMP HEMP solves everything starvation, homelessness, poverty, pollution