Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!ucbvax!mc.lcs.mit.edu!KFL From: KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU ("Keith F. Lynch") Newsgroups: net.space Subject: (none) Message-ID: <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].844266.860309.KFL> Date: Sun, 9-Mar-86 18:41:11 EST Article-I.D.: <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].844266.860309.KFL> Posted: Sun Mar 9 18:41:11 1986 Date-Received: Wed, 12-Mar-86 03:35:30 EST Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 34 From: jon@csvax.caltech.edu How long should we keep up this 2% growth rate? Year Population Area (sq. mi) Area needed / Area of the Earth needed @ 10 acres/person ----- ------------- --------------- ------------------------------- 0 4e+09 6.25e+07 0.310849 100 2.89786e+10 4.5279e+08 2.25199 200 2.0994e+11 3.28031e+09 16.3149 300 1.52094e+12 2.37647e+10 118.196 ... If we define the present population density of Hong Kong, 12,000 people per square mile, as the limit, then the world can support about 200 times the population you estimate. We don't run into trouble for 300 years. This just shows that we should have many large space colonies operating by then if we want population to be able to continue to grow at this rate. As for right now, the world is mostly underpopulated. I agree that unless birth rates decrease or death rates increase, this will not remain the case for more than another century or so. I don't think the population is going to increase at 2% forever. It does tend to be lower in wealthier countries. It should drop everywhere once more people in more countries reach a western standard of wealth. I *DO* think it should always remain a matter of personal choice. If people do not like to live around highly populated areas, why is it that most people tend to clump into heavily populated cities, rather than distributing themselves fairly evenly across the world? ...Keith