Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. POPULATION EXPLOSION FUELS DEMAND FOR ENERGY
12/13/07 | Joe Lyons

Posted on 12/13/2007 9:31:28 AM PST by westcoastwillieg

U.S. POPULATION EXPLOSION FUELS DEMAND FOR ENERGY

Must see video at: href=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7WJeqxuOfQ

Behind China and India, the U.S. is the third most populous nation in the world and we’re fast catching up. As population grows so does the amount of energy we need. Just as two people require more water than one person so it is with energy in a modern society.

To be sure there are ways to conserve but there is a limit to how much we can conserve without self destructing. There is no magic bullet and our dependence on foreign oil will range far into the future.

With the rapid industrialization of other areas of the world, natural resources will be in short supply---some already are. Our president refuses to deal with the massive population growth that is fueling the demand for water and energy.

For some reason the president and our State Department are intent on dumping as many people as they can onto our shores. Recently our Secretary of State granted an immigration waiver so that many of the 9,300 Burmese refugees at a camp in Thailand can be considered for resettlement in the United States. If you think our roads, schools, prisons and hospitals are jammed today just wait a few years.

The hole our president is digging gets deeper every day---to bring the U.S. to its knees, all our enemies have to do is wait until our population outstrips the supply of energy we can afford; if our good citizens don’t act, it may be sooner than you think.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: energy; immigration; oil; population
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 last
To: westcoastwillieg
More support for the environazi population control agenda.

No conservative should support this population control crap.

Opposition to illegal immigration is great -- but don't be useful idiots for the radical left.

21 posted on 12/13/2007 10:16:21 AM PST by JohnnyZ (victim victim Mitt victim victim Romneyvictim victim victim so persecuted, poor me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: westcoastwillieg
SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE!

Methinks you should read some Julian Simon. We have more than enough resources worldwide for a food/energy SURPLUS. Besides, population growth has been slowing worldwide since the 1960s.

Leave "population control" to the lefties.

22 posted on 12/13/2007 10:18:07 AM PST by Clemenza (Rudy Giuliani, like Pesto and Seattle, belongs in the scrap heap of '90s Culture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

Sounds like a job for Captain Hyperbole!


23 posted on 12/13/2007 10:18:29 AM PST by Larry Lucido (Hunter 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: westcoastwillieg
all our enemies have to do is wait until our population outstrips the supply of energy

Not buying that Edmund Muskie Club of Rome Family Planning Malthusianism.

24 posted on 12/13/2007 10:20:54 AM PST by RightWhale (anti-razors are pro-life)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: westcoastwillieg; Dark Wing; Dog Gone

Dang illegal immigrants.


25 posted on 12/13/2007 10:33:49 AM PST by Thud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
Fast catching up? We’re not even close and the only reason we may be coming closer is their death rates are higher.

We are catching up to China, but not India, but it will take at least another century. China has a population of 1.3 billion with an annual population growth rate of .606% and a total fertility rate of 1.75 children born/woman. The US has a population of 303 hundred million, annual growth rate .894%, and a total fertility rate of 2.09 children born/woman. India has a population of 1.1 billion, annual growth rate 1.606%, and a total fertility rate of 2.81 children born/woman.

Currently, 1.6 million legal and illegal immigrants settle in the country each year; 350,000 immigrants leave each year, resulting in net immigration of 1.25 million. If immigration continues at current levels, the nation’s population will increase from 301 million today to 468 million in 2060 — a 167 million (56 percent) increase. Immigrants plus their descendents will account for 105 million (63 percent) of the increase. The total projected growth of 167 million is equal to the combined populations of Great Britain, France, and Spain. The 105 million from immigration by itself is equal to 13 additional New York Cities.

The author's point, and I agree with it, is that our population growth, the highest in the developed world, will have a major impact on global energy consumption because we use more per capita than anyone else. We are going to have to run just to stand still in terms of our energy needs.

26 posted on 12/13/2007 10:57:47 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: heywoodubuzzoff

I wish that were the case. The Sierra Club and other environmental groups refuse to get involved with the immigration issue even though it will have a major impact on the environment. It is like NOW not condemning Clinton for his womanizing.


27 posted on 12/13/2007 10:59:51 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sandreckoner
See my post #28. Our pro-population growth immigration policy, i.e., legal immigration, is having a greater effect on our population numbers than illegal immigration. With half of the children ages 0-5 being minorities, the non-Hispanic white poulation of the US in 2050 will be 50%, down from the 89% in 1970. We have added 100 million to our population since 1970 and will add another 167 million by 2060. So in 90 years will have gone from a country of 200 million to 467 million. Demography is destiny.

Bureau of the Census: Projected Population of the United States, by Race and Hispanic Origin: 2000 to 2050

28 posted on 12/13/2007 11:09:05 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Comment #29 Removed by Moderator

Comment #30 Removed by Moderator

To: kabar

“The author’s point, and I agree with it, is that our population growth, the highest in the developed world, will have a major impact on global energy consumption because we use more per capita than anyone else. We are going to have to run just to stand still in terms of our energy needs.”

303 million has a long way to go to get to 1.3 billion. The growth rates in latin and middle eastern countries is higher. The issue is that most countries don’t track accurately.

As for energy use; I don’t buy that the US uses that much more energy per capita than other countries. The US tracks these more accurately and reports more honestly.

China and India have over a billion people. They are exempt from all the discussions on controls. This entire debacle is solely an effort to suck money out of America.


31 posted on 12/13/2007 11:35:31 AM PST by driftdiver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Mohito Loe
Teen birth rate only.

Unless the life chances of children raised by single mothers suddenly improve, the explosive growth of the U.S. Hispanic population over the next couple of decades does not bode well for American social stability.

The dimensions of the Hispanic baby boom are startling. The Hispanic birthrate is twice as high as that of the rest of the American population. That high fertility rate – even more than unbounded levels of immigration – will fuel the rapid Hispanic population boom in the coming decades.

By 2050, the Latino population will have tripled, the Census Bureau projects. One in four Americans will be Hispanic by midcentury, twice the current ratio.

It's the fertility surge among unwed Hispanics that should worry policymakers. Hispanic women have the highest unmarried birthrate in the country – over three times that of whites and Asians, and nearly 1 ½ times that of black women, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Every 1,000 unmarried Hispanic women bore 92 children in 2003 (the latest year for which data exist), compared with 28 children for unmarried white women, 22 for unmarried Asian women, and 66 for unmarried black women.

32 posted on 12/13/2007 11:36:01 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

Comment #33 Removed by Moderator

To: Mohito Loe
Hispanics are Americans too. What’s your problem with Hispanics?

The Hispanic Challenge By Samuel P. Huntington

34 posted on 12/13/2007 11:50:17 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: westcoastwillieg
What nonsense. The population rising is supposed to make us unable to afford energy, huh? Right, that is why we only have affordable energy back in 1783, when people lived by candlelight and the only energy came from burning wood you gathered and chopped yourself.

Rising population fuels rising economic growth fuels new technology after new technology, yields abundant power ever more efficiently. But the Malthusians haven't changed one note of the hymn, despite it being stompingly wrong for 200 years and counting.

35 posted on 12/13/2007 4:32:01 PM PST by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: westcoastwillieg
Aren't we importing something like 15% of our refined petroleum products? We simply don't have enough refinery capacity. This will really make us vulnerable.
36 posted on 12/13/2007 4:39:22 PM PST by TheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson