Population Out of Control?

Population growth is a commonly debated topic in relation to environmental health. Certainly at some point, an ecosystem will no longer be able to support a growing population and further growth will be curtailed by a loss of resources. In addition, population does lead to a strain on the environment as more land, more food, and more water is consumed while generating more waste. When addressing remediation and sustainable use of resources, the question arises if the current population not only hinders progress, but also makes remedies impossible. I do not believe that we are currently there. I believe that we can address the world's most pressing environmental issues without addressing the population problem. Although population is a factor and will at some point need to be addressed, the last 100 years has shown that access to clean water and sufficient food can become easier and more widespread throughout the world, even as population continues to grow exponentially. 

Pressing Environmental Issue

There are many environmental issues today that are of great consequence to the future of our lives. From deforestation to run-off to global climate change. It is difficult to rank some of these in order of importance, especially since it is important to work on all of them at least to some degree. I think the three most pressing issues are global warming, deforestation, and eutrophication. All of them are tied together and often reinforce each other. It might be better to tackle them as one rather than fighting each individual concern separately. Of the three, I think that eutrophication will have the most immediate impact. The growing population will increase our use of agriculture and the globalization of industries continues to increase. This will lead to increased use of fertilizers, which is already the leading manufactured chemical on the planet. This is also not highly publicized, making the problem grow without pushback to slow the problem. Over use of fertilization leads to toxic algae blooms as well as anoxic or death zones. Just a year or two ago, there was a 1 week media blitz over the growing red algae problem in Florida. It did not last long on national media, yet the over-fertilization continues. A major challenge in tackling this issue is that it directly conflicts with growing more food to ease the food security issues of the world. Unless we address that issue simultaneously, there will be no quick solution to the problem.

All a Matter of Perspective

 Recently, our class role-played two scenarios to gain an understanding of perspective on contextualizing stories and forming policy. In the first, a boy has a dog-walking job, and the dogs escape while chasing a cat, trampling a neighbor's flower bed. The reaction of the witnesses were very different, depending on their background, stake in the event, and perspective. For instance, the flower bed owner treated his flowers as family, and would obviously be very upset by what happened. Meanwhile, a girl who was afraid of cats, probably would get a kick out of the events, especially since cats were being chased. So, perspective matters a lot, and resolving conflict is easier once you understand the background, bias, and perspective of those involved. In the second scenario, 6 stake-holders hold a Town Hall Forum to discuss the placement of a new factory in Town X. One of the first things to recognize about policy making is that you rarely can please everyone involved. Compromise will help spread the pain or joy of the final decision. Some hold on to their position strongly and will refuse to compromise or be very upset by any compromise that is taken. One of the good things I observed this year was that the role-players were much more amenable to compromise. That is a good sign for our policy makers of tomorrow.

Food Energy Water Waste Footprint - 2020

Karen Kirk and John Thomas devised a rubric for calculating an individual's food, energy, water, and waste footprint in a web available document entitled, "LIFESTYLE PROJECT" (https://serc.carleton.edu/introgeo/enviroprojects/lifestyle.html). I modified the calculations a bit to include public transportation, water use in food, and more detailed food energy values. I recorded as much food and energy usage as I could remember over a two day period. This is the third year that I calculated by FEWW footprint. I am disappointed that my energy use has increased each year. This year, it was 300,000 BTU/day. Although disappointing, it is not too surprising. Because of my frequent trips to NIST this year and the COVID-19 pandemic, I am driving this year instead of using the metro. As a result, transportation accounted for 40% of my energy use. I was successful at reducing my water and waste footprint. I used 10% less water by replacing some of my meat with vegetable and milk proteins. I am still surprised that food represents 80% of my water use! Looking to the future, I do plan to return to public transportation. With the other energy cutting measures I have taken previously, I think reaching 200,00 BTU/day is within reach. For comparisons, the U.S. Energy Information Administration provides some data on residential energy use (https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=85&t=1), which ranges between 181,000 BTU/day (Hawaii) and 274,000 BTU/day (North Dakota).

Food Energy Water Waste Footprint

I calculated a 2-day average of my Food, Energy, Water, & Waste footprint and compared it to both last year and the average in the United States. My energy footprint was higher this year than last year. This year, I averaged 270,000 BTU/day. This is a 5% increase and is a little higher than the average per capita use in North Dakota (the highest state average of energy use). There were three main contributors to this increase: I traveled further to work (by Metro), I kept lights on longer, and I used a clothes dryer to de-wrinkle some clothes rather than an iron. Surprisingly, this last item amounted to a  10,000 BTU increase in energy!! My water usage was about the same. Excluding food, I used 100 gal/day, which is slightly below the national average and significantly lower than the DC average. My waste weighed about 5 lbs/day, which is slightly higher than average. This was skewed to slightly higher values because I had to throw out my watermelon before consuming it. It had split open and was foaming just two days after purchase. It must have over-ripened and was fermenting before I even purchased it. Two things I will change in the future is to reduce my light usage and not use the clothes dryer to de-wrinkle clothes.

A Homemade Scientific Method Experiment

In class, we discussed the benefits and methods of the STEM field in solving some of the most complex problems facing us today. We examined the methods typically used by scientists and engineers and explored through in-class activities the differences in approaches of these two related fields. Whereas engineers typical approach a problem with prototype designs and a desire to efficiently solve a problem, the scientific method generally tries to explain a problem to pave the way for engineering design. For instance, we might want to extend the time period of plant growth by delaying the color change of leaves. To address this from a scientists perspective, it might be helpful to know if leaves on a plant change colors and fall off due to cooler weather, less light, or both. (I have been told it is both, but have not asked a biologist or verified this comment.)  We could set up an array of growth lights on a timer to extend the light exposure for plants that are outside without changing the exposure to cooler weather. By bringing some of the same type plants indoors and growing them on a windowsill of an unused room, we can test if the light cycle triggers leaf changes without the change in temperatures. As a final control, we could expose a 2nd set of indoor plants to growth lights. The engineer would benefit in designing a automated system that extends plant growth with the least amount of energy by knowing which factors (light or temperature or both) need to be controlled efficiently.

Population Explosion

Without reducing rapid population growth, will it will be possible to solve the world’s global
Challenges? My first thought was that population would continue to put an increasing burden on our natural resources and force a confrontation on the issue to continue solving other environmental issues. Then, I discovered the statistics that undernourishment and those without access to clean drinking water have declined rapidly over the past 30 years. In 1987, 19% of the world's population were undernourished and 27% did not have access to clean drinking water. Today, those numbers have dropped to 11% and 9%, respectively. This is despite the fact that the world population has increased from 5 billion to 7.5 billion people. Add to this that the population growth rate that exploded after the industrial revolution (0.5% - 0.6% between 1700 and 1927, increasing sharply to 2.1% in 1974) has started to decline (1.2% today). Some population models predict a leveling off of population around 11 or 12 billion people in 2100. This suggests that population is not yet a crushing burden on our resources and that we can solve many of today's environmental issues without immediately addressing world population growth.