Has anyone included climate change effects in world population projections?

[Mr. Morden]

Just curious: In the very long term estimates of global population projections, that attempt to predict the Earth's population in 2100 and beyond, do any of the predictions account for the impact of climate change on human population?  Is it anticipated that, if nothing is done to mitigate climate change, it'll mean a significant hit to the Earth's population a century or so hence, or is the idea that it would just make the existing population more miserable?

[Tender Branson]

Climate change (=> catastrophic events that are maybe caused by it) are killing "only" 100.000 people or so each year.

Compared to fertility changes etc. these numbers are less than peanuts and won't impact population growth rates at all.

Of course, if we include air pollution as part of climate change - then this results in millions of deaths around the globe ...

[Mr. Morden]

Climate change (=> catastrophic events that are maybe caused by it) are killing "only" 100.000 people or so each year.

Compared to fertility changes etc. these numbers are less than peanuts and won't impact population growth rates at all.

Right, but I thought that the idea was that a century from now, the impact would be much greater, with sea levels rising, various regions becoming uninhabitable, etc?  Not sure how many that would kill, as opposed to affecting the # of new births, but at some point it's going to have an impact on global population, no?

[100% pro-life no matter what]

The idea that any slight natural warming of the Earth will cause significant effects on humans is science fiction.  Temperatures on Earth used to be 25 degrees warmer, and they're cyclical.

I will take my 75 degree 'winter' day any day of the week!

[Gunnar Larsson]

Climate change (=> catastrophic events that are maybe caused by it) are killing "only" 100.000 people or so each year.

Climate change influences the economic activity in a country through crop production etc. and making lots of areas less liveable. As far as I know it does not take into account such factors, as I remember from reading about the methodology used for UN projections only included factors related to human society and no environmental factors. When you look at the projections for some African countries you have to seriously wonder about how any kind of carrying capacity would influence population growth.

[YaBoyNY]

The idea that any slight natural warming of the Earth will cause significant effects on humans is science fiction.  Temperatures on Earth used to be 25 degrees warmer, and they're cyclical.

I will take my 75 degree 'winter' day any day of the week!

lol republicans

[Ban my account ffs!]

They don't.  And they probably won't beyond a small increase in deaths because the predictions are very crude.  They pretty much assume beyond 10 years out that things will generally begin working towards the mean.

So the fertility rate in high fertility nations will see a gradual fall towards 2 babies per woman while low fertility nations will see a gradual rise towards 2 babies per woman.

The death rate will generally decrease at a slow rate with the rate of increase decreasing as nations approach the mean.

That's why the UN comes out every couple years with wildly different forecasts (several years ago it was going to 8.9 billion and then flatlining... now because fertility seems to be rising somewhat in developed nations.. it's 11 billion and WORSE THAN WE THOUGHT OMGZ! even as developing nations continue to see rapid declines in fertility)

[DINGO Joe]

The idea that any slight natural warming of the Earth will cause significant effects on humans is science fiction.  Temperatures on Earth used to be 25 degrees warmer, and they're cyclical.

I will take my 75 degree 'winter' day any day of the week!

Nice touch that you're in TN, been to any good monkey trials lately?

[RI]

Climate change (=> catastrophic events that are maybe caused by it) are killing "only" 100.000 people or so each year.

Climate change influences the economic activity in a country through crop production etc. and making lots of areas less liveable.

Sure, but it also opens new areas to crop production.

[DINGO Joe]

Climate change (=> catastrophic events that are maybe caused by it) are killing "only" 100.000 people or so each year.

Climate change influences the economic activity in a country through crop production etc. and making lots of areas less liveable.

Sure, but it also opens new areas to crop production.

It's not automatic that soil in new areas are conducive to crop growing.

[Mr. Morden]

OK, let me rephrase the question: Even if no one has ever done a rigorous calculation to produce specific numbers, has anyone ever offered even a qualitative guess as to what climate change would do to world population a century or so hence, if we were to imagine something on the more pessimistic side of predictions for the impact of climate change?  OK, so it makes certain regions of the Earth unliveable.  What does that mean, in practice?  Birth rates fall, death rates rise, or just mass migration of people to more liveable regions where they have just as many babies as they'd have in their homeland?

Any way to guess which of those factors is dominant?  Any way to even take a shot in the dark as to whether 2 or 3  or 4 C or whatever of warming is enough to impact world population in any notable way, or would it take much more than that to do anything?

I mean we have stuff like this talking about "human extinction" within a century because of climate change, and I'm wondering how alarmist that is, and what is the less alarmist version of that.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

OK, let me rephrase the question: Even if no one has ever done a rigorous calculation to produce specific numbers, has anyone ever offered even a qualitative guess as to what climate change would do to world population a century or so hence, if we were to imagine something on the more pessimistic side of predictions for the impact of climate change?  OK, so it makes certain regions of the Earth unliveable.  What does that mean, in practice?  Birth rates fall, death rates rise, or just mass migration of people to more liveable regions where they have just as many babies as they'd have in their homeland?

Any way to guess which of those factors is dominant?  Any way to even take a shot in the dark as to whether 2 or 3  or 4 C or whatever of warming is enough to impact world population in any notable way, or would it take much more than that to do anything?

I mean we have stuff like this talking about "human extinction" within a century because of climate change, and I'm wondering how alarmist that is, and what is the less alarmist version of that.

Worst case, Vostok Antartica will have pleasant temperatures.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

The idea that any slight natural warming of the Earth will cause significant effects on humans is science fiction.  Temperatures on Earth used to be 25 degrees warmer, and they're cyclical.

I will take my 75 degree 'winter' day any day of the week!

Lol oh the stupidity.

[Mr. Morden]

*bump*

This thread:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=269954.0

reminded me of this topic.  OK, so a reasonably large fraction of the world becomes unliveable by 2100.  So what happens with world population?  Does it go into a decline far beyond what the UN population projections are forecasting?

[Strudelcutie4427]

Climate change (=> catastrophic events that are maybe caused by it) are killing "only" 100.000 people or so each year.

Climate change influences the economic activity in a country through crop production etc. and making lots of areas less liveable.

Sure, but it also opens new areas to crop production.

Actually have seen studies saying that the Sahara is shrinking as the Sahel grasslands are spreading north. Perhaps there could be arable land in Africa to actually feed the continent. While I believe the next ice age is thousands of years off it should effect the Southern Hemisphere due to rotational and orbital eccentricies that will cause the south to face away from the sun at the perigee and towards it at the apogee. However, a southern ice age would, (going off info from the Northern Ice Age -10000 years ago) would only glacierize southern Patagonia and maybe New Zealand's South Island. The north should heat up as an inverse opening more arable land in wide open but frozen wastelands like Canada and Russia.