Can Global Food Production Keep Up With Population Growth?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 жов 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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Yes. We can.
And I am not eating insects, no matter what ecobolsheviks propaganda says.
Well, crab and lobsters looks horrible but taste good, insects might taste fine but I simply dont't have the guts to try any.
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.
Comrade Second Thought strikes again, advocating for mutual aid!
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
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.
2:59
“The spread of disease”
*Shows mosquito*
*_HOLD UP_*
Were you not aware that mosquitoes can spread disease?
Been loving your videos lately mate! Keep it up!
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
I'm really liking your videos I only want to suggest for you to put sources for the information.
awesome video, you are quickly becoming my favorite youtube channel, keep it up :)
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!
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.
Keep up with the good work!!! I learn new things everyday! We have to put more thought into these kinds of problems.
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.
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.
You are a genius thank you for making content man
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.
To be fair most of the stuff in American grocery stores is NOT food
I'd say the vast majority of severe famine is caused exclusively by political conflicts and corruption. Venezuela for example
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
Wow, fantastically produced video.Very thought provoking
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.
Please postulate for a political position. I and many many others will vote for you you have the voice that the people need.
What a fine work this content is man, srlsy
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
Been working on towerfarm designs for Africa, designed in such a way that they can be deployed anywhere on the continent and would produce yields of up to 15 tones per acre, every cycle. The problem is that while buying land is cheap, and even the deployment is easy. Funding for such a project is simply not possible to get. Meaning the way forward is to archive the designs and use my skills to build the capital. Thing is, that's not the ultimate goal of these farms. The real goal is to bring these farms to space and have them utilized as part of long term projects like terraforming worlds (the forest effect) and in long term missions like setting up mining operations. My current life expectancy is not long enough to deploy these. I certainly do not think there are going to be people who think like me. It's very disappointing, since these would solve the food security problem quite permanently, and enable people to focus on other issues. I think it would make our society significantly grow.
This video: *exists*
Me: “Ah, Malthus. We meet again.”
"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~
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
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.
I really love your new content, keep up the good work
You have great videos! Would you mind posting links your script and sources in you video descriptions? I'd love to do more research on the topics you talk about.
how is barely anybody talking about stores throwing food away. Its such an easy fix to stop it as well.
Not only we are already producing more food than everyone can eat, we are also producing (or at least able to produce) shelters, clothes, running water, electricity, transportation, internet connectivity, smartphones, basic education and healthcare, etc., way more than humanity can consume. The fact that so many people still cannot obtain those stuff despite all the abundance is beyond me.
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
War leads to poverty. Poverty leads to hunger. Hunger...leads to the dark side.
40 billion! The planet is dying from the waste and over fishing now! $) billion and no fuel!
''Thomas Robert Malthus''
Can the population continue to grow infinitely ?? Is the earth surface and food supply infinite ???
for how long ????
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.
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 :)
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
For developed countries: yes
For the rest of the world: no
One job that could be covered under a Federal Jobs Guarantee is a delivery driver for farmers and grocery stores who's products are approaching their best-by date.
As of 2018 about 800 million people in the world experienced a lack of sufficiently nutritious food. Because many of them id not earning too much to feed family. People was suffer wide spread hunger. In the video its say that the global food production estimate that the worlds farmer can produce enough food to feed one amd a half time the total world population. But because of waste efficient distribution war climate change many people suffering hunger
You forgot to mention about land ownership. Those rich families buy a large land for them which doesn't provide much for the community. Moreover, companies buy idle lands and farms to convert into business buildings instead of farming.
This is one of those problem were I have no clue how it still exist today. This just seems like easy money for a new business to come along and distribute the food or some billionaire to do it for the brownie points.
Very well done video.
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 UA-cam I guess 😞
I just want to point out the "better protein" falacy:
>Meat is nutritious because it provides micronutrients in bioavailable form, it is not just protein.
>Carbon contribution from cattle to climate change is dumb. The cow is just part of the carbon cycle. Every single atom of carbon the cow releases has been captured by a plant. Then it is released and captured again. Climate change happens when this cycle is disrupted. Fossil fuels disrupt the cycle because they introduce new carbon mass that has not been around from eons ago.
>Meat from different grazing animals (not just cows) can be grown on land that does not support crops so they are not mutually exclusive. You can have both. However, if you have ever tried wild game and grass fed and finished cattle you will realize it has different flavor. While meat has its nutritional value, excessive consumption can be corrected from producing grazing animals in actual pastures (a more nutritious and humane form of raising them). The reason people will consume less of it is its strong flavor and that wouldn't be a problem since the meat is of higher quality.
You're not quite right about the cattle and carbon. Cows give off methane which whilst it contains the carbon from the plants is a significantly worse greenhouse gas than CO2 in that it is more effective at trapping heat. Beat cows currently give off so much methane because they are fed a really bad diet, a diet that's extremely wasteful in that it is grown on land that could be used for human food.
Cattle have a role in our shift but you are right in that it shouldn't be about removing meat from our diets or removing cows from our farms. It requires changing how we farm livestock. Instead of factory farming, it requires using livestock to replace the vast herds of large mammals long since driven to extinction or currently on the way out if practices don't change. Livestock if lept in large dense herds and regularly moved across the land drives processes that rebuild soil and facilitates ecological recovery on a massive scale and it sequesters carbon. But it requires us to move away from providing fodder for the animals, they should only be grazing, and it requires us not pumping them full of antibiotics and anti-parasite drugs both of which destroy any chance of healthy ecological processes that break down manure and create soil.
Amazing video,👍👍
Cultured meat and dairy should be considered in this video. Not to mention vertical farmings ability to be even in underground locations.
Yes but not sure if we can distribute it.
The starving toddler with the Winnie the Pooh bear is a great metaphor.
Malthus: Hold my +ve checks
Right?
Very informative!
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.
Capital, comrades, is the problem. Consumerism is the great distraction of Labor.
Thanks for continuing to promote humanism and community 2ndT :)
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
Thanos: "I told you so!"
Avengers: "oh snap!"
TY! Just note that consuming poultry instead of red meat is most likely bad in terms of animal welfare. For the same amount of meat, more chickens are killed since they have a smaller mass. In addition, chickens tend to live much worse lives.
Dr Walt Willett, professor of medicine at Harvard University, says we could eliminate the worst cases of world hunger today with about 40 million tonnes of food - yet 760 million tonnes is fed to animals on farms every year.
The point is that sooner or later it will become unsustainable, if growth of population, consumption etc. continues, then producing enough food one day will mean being beyond our limits. Overshoot-collapse trajectory is inevitable with infinite growth paradigm, and new technology can only postpone the inevitable. So, economic inequality is the biggest problem, but so is the paradigm of endless economic growth, which "should never stop" in current system. It need endless growth or production, consumption and population, which together will be a recipe for disaster. Read articles by William E. Rees... He and many others question current paradigm of growth
Also, the fact that other species and natural ecosystems are lost, for me at least, are bad enough! They don't matter less than humans
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 don’t think the problem is that we can’t feed 7 billion people I think the problem is that we can’t sustain the environment with 7 billion people. The climate is already changing in a negative way and it’s certainly not going to get any better if we continue the way we are
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.
I would love the source used for that 40 billion carrying capacity figure...
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.
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.
sure non-profits can help and potentially fill the gap on the hunger crisis but wouldnt it be more uniform and definative to have systematic processes to ensure the same
our earth is falling apart🥺😭
define food; other cultures consume it as delicacy others a taboo unappealing.
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.
Easier to initiate wars if people go hungry, don't forget how much money can be made from wars. Hence I believe there will never be a point where people are allowed to be feed
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.
Has anyone thought of this? The same land mass during the great depression era of 150 million people is trying to feed 320 million people....
Your political videos are the best, even if we share some different pov
19th century Farms: Flat
20th century Farms: Vertical
21st century Farms: On the moon
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?
Question? What happens if the power goes out for a good period of time, or the sun give off a serge of solar flares and knocks out the power for months or years, and we become dependent on this new growing method of vegetation? “Just saying” Good video..
our corporate owners won't like giving away food for free.
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
Ever heard of Malthus Theory?
Basically 200 years ago, some scholar claimed that since there is limited land to grow food, there must be a limit to how big the population can get. He started advocating for abstinence and took his belief to "it's the end of the world" level of panic. What he didn't realize is as he was developing this theory, agricultural technology was exploding with progress. We developed ways to produce the same amount of food in less space, along with preservatives to keep food fresh longer. Sufficed to say, the world did not end shortly after Malthus put his theory forward.
The moral of the story (in my eyes) is that humans are capable of remarkable things when they are forced by nature to act. It's what makes humans so special; We are resilient. The fact that we continuously improve our food production resources just shows that we as a species understand how to sustain ourselves in the long-term.
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...
Since most counties in Europe don't grow yes, and the counties that aren't able to keep up already have issues now as far as I know.
We need to educate our consumers.
It is not about production, it is about distribution. We already produce more then enough to feed the whole planet including animals for three times and still have food letting to rot, it is that political reason to stop distribution which make food not allow to go to who needs it most.
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.
The amount of food wastage is sad.
Invest in better logistics and supply chain management.
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.
The use of technology and safe GMOs could provide part of the solution. Here in the Netherlands there is a lot of research done by our agricultural university Wageningen in cooperation with farmers to use drones and censors on farmland to maximise the efficiency of water, fertiliser and pesticides.
Yo henk
@@armiferafatum2459 hallo
Je kan ook mss eens stoppen met zoveel koeien te produceren? Dan doe je ook meteen iets aan jullie 'stikstofcrisis'.
Great stuff.