It's been
40 years since Stanford University population biologist Paul Ehrlich warned of
imminent global catastrophe in his book "The Population Bomb." As it
turns out, the book was aptly, though ironically, named.
Ehrlich predicted that, "In the 1970's, the world will undergo famines
hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death.
"At this late date, nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the
world death rate …”
Forty years later, no such mass starvation has come to pass. While there
have been tragic famines resulting in millions of deaths since 1968, none
occurred because global food production failed to keep pace with population
growth the core of Ehrlich’s hypothesis. Per capita global food production has,
instead, increased by 26.5 percent between 1968 and 2005, according to the
World Resources Institute. The number of people who starve to death daily
declined from 41,000 in 1977 to 24,000 today, according to The Hunger Project,
an organization combating global hunger.
The roots of recent hunger generally lie in a combination of transient
localized crop failures, political instability, and ill-conceived government
policies. The U.N. attributes the current world food “crisis,” for example, to
recent reduced harvests and crop failures in Europe and Australia,
respectively; rapidly growing demand for subsidized grain-based biofuels; and
lower surplus crop inventories due to reduced subsidies.
Ehrlich also fretted in "The Population Bomb" that we were
depleting the world oxygen supply by paving terrestrial areas, burning fossil
fuels and clearing tropical forests. Green party campaigner Peter Tatchell
recently reasserted this claim in the U.K. newspaper, The Guardian. “Compared
to prehistoric times, the level of oxygen in the earth’s atmosphere has
declined by over a third and in polluted cities the decline may be more than 50
percent,” Tatchell wrote.
But as physicist Luboš Motl points out in his blog, the oxygen scare is
nonsense. Atmospheric oxygen has been at 20.94 percent or 20.95 percent for
thousands of years, amounting to about 150,000 tons of oxygen per capita. Motl
estimates that, at most, any atmospheric oxygen drop due to the combustion of
fossil fuels might — at most — be 0.02 percent, a loss that could easily be
offset by natural oxygen-producing processes.
Ehrlich also warned in "The Population Bomb" that manmade
emissions of carbon dioxide would cause catastrophic global warming. He
suggested that a few degrees of heating could melt the polar ice caps and raise
sea level by 250 feet, even out fear-mongering Al ’20-foot tidal wave’ Gore on
his best worst day.
“Gondola to the Empire State Building, anyone?” Ehrlich asked.
But average sea level rise between 1961 and 2003 was only about 0.007 inches
per year, according to the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and
no one can offer more than mere speculation as to the cause of that barely
noticeable increase.
Ehrlich’s proposal to avert global catastrophe was to limit or stop
population growth. The most efficient way of doing this, he suggested, was for
the government to add chemicals to the water or to food to temporarily
sterilize people.
“Those of you who are appalled at such a suggestion can rest easy,” he
wrote, “the option isn’t even open to us, thanks to the criminal inadequacy of
biomedical research in this area.”
So, instead, he proposed a Department of Population and Environment to
implement population control laws.
Ehrlich’s goal was to maintain world population at “one or even two billion,”
which he suggested “could be sustained in reasonable comfort for 1,000 years if
resources were husbanded carefully.” He did acknowledge that we might “still
have a chance” if the population stabilizes at four or five billion, but “of
course, mankind’s options will be fewer and people’s lives almost certainly
less pleasant than if the lower figure is attained.”
But world population in 1968 exceeded 3.5 billion already way over Ehrlich’s
goal. Today, world population exceeds 6.6 billion almost double what it was in
1968 and past the point of even having a “chance” of survival, according to
Ehrlich.
Have we run out of food? Has population become unsustainable? According to
U.N. statistics, the number of people in the developing world who were considered
to be undernourished in 1968 was estimated at about 900 million. That estimate
is on track to be reduced by more than 50 percent by 2015, according to the
U.N. So while world population has just about doubled, global hunger will just
about have been cut in half. Tremendous worldwide economic growth and
technological advances ignored or not foreseen by Ehrlich have made this
achievement possible.
Given how Ehrlich’s predictions turned out, you might think that he vanished
into the dustbin of Chicken Little history or at least revised his ideas,
right?
Wrong. The Stanford professor is a member of the prestigious National
Academy of Sciences and has been honored by the United Nations, MacArthur
Foundation, Sierra Club, World Wildlife Fund, Ecological Society of America and
the American Institute of Biological Sciences to name a few. Worse, he’s still
at it.
In 1968, Ehrlich helped form the group Zero Population Growth (ZPG), which
was euphemistically renamed “Population Connection” in 2002. In the 40th anniversary
issue of the official publication of Population Connection, Ehrlich warns that
“ZPG’s 1968 message that [global population] must stop growing is now more
urgent than ever.”
“Each additional person in the population puts disproportionate stress on
our life support systems … And Americans have the heaviest resource and
environmental ‘footprints’ of all,” he claims.
Contrary to Ehrlich-think, however, more people have been a boom, not a
bomb. They’ve led to an economic boom rather than a bust. In any event, who
should decide who is to be born free-willed individuals or Ehrlich’s population
police?