At the turn of the 18^th-19^th Century

Malthus wrote his now famous

‘Essay on the Principle of Population’

Postulating that increasing numbers

Must eventually produce pressures

Upon available resources

Such that the size of the population

Would inevitably and naturally

Fall back to a sustainable limit

Perhaps because of:

Disease, food shortage

And the ultimate form

Of aggressive competition: War.

Some have sought to ‘debunk’ his concept;

For example, on the basis that

Human ingenuity and science

Have always managed to enable humanity

To become so much more Efficient, Effective

And Economic [3 of the famous 4Es!]

In food and production of necessities,

That supply has always run ahead

Of the population growth curve.

But, in the face of projections

Suggesting global population

Is heading for nearly 11 billion by 2100 –

A 30% increase on today –

Will it always work like this?

 .

I can see some problems…..

.

-There ARE obviously limits to resources

Even if we can eke them out somewhat

And recycle virtually everything ad infinitum.

-Yes, science always seems to have ‘saved us’

But that doesn’t mean it always will:

History is only an indication

Of what could possibly be:

It’s by no means a guarantee that it will be.

-Efficiency and productivity gains

Require more energy input

And for the foreseeable they’ll be fossil-based

[Producing more CO2 with

All Its attendant negative impacts

Upon climate and food production].

-Squashing us together in cities

And global travel and transport

Making communicable diseases more likely:

Currently CoVid, MonkeyPox … and to come…?

 .

-The lack of the 4^th E: Equity:

Take the current food, energy & water wars:

Seems we’d rather compete with violence

Than be fair and square and content to share.

As they say: ‘E numbers are a bitch’.

NB. Why the Castle of Carcassonne?  It derived its name from a seige where fighting for food, water and wood for warmth were critical to survival.  If you don’t know the story – look it up: it’s a good one!