- #36
DiracPool
- 1,243
- 516
mheslep said:As U.S. fertility rates have now dipped below replacement levels, per cap energy use is a significant predictor of where U.S. total energy consumption will lie in future. That, and immigration which is the only reason U.S. young population continues to increase. Note that immigration carries no exponential increase built-in.
Also, there were several things different in 1968 besides population. There were, for instance, no 104 nuclear reactors, no shale gas of significance, no 50 mpg cars, no widespread use of heat pumps, no ~95 percent efficient residential gas furnaces, no million barrels per day production of corn ethanol, no 2.8 l per 100km per seat jets, no 60 percent efficient combined cycle gas electric power plants.
That doesn't mean anything.. You increase efficiency by 30 percent but increase the greedy mouths and selfishness by 200 percent. I don't think your 100 km per seat jet is the issue here, I think it's unchecked population growth.
Forget about US fertility rates. The issue is world-wide fertility rates, which are roughly 350/250. I haven't done it recently, but several years back I did a rough calculation, and figured that about 250,000 people die everyday worldwide, and about 350,000 are born.