The buzz behind 7 billion people: A milestone and a warning
October 26th, 2011
12:46 PM ET

The buzz behind 7 billion people: A milestone and a warning

Trying to assess the importance of the United Nations' upcoming celebration of the global population reaching 7 billion is sort of like trying to assess the meaning of life.

As the countdown clock to the date keeps ticking, and people keep buzzing about the number, many are trying to figure out the real importance of hitting that marker.

The Wall Street Journal proposed the question: "How Do You Get to 7 Billion People?" The article raised the question: Exactly how do you know that we are reaching this symbolic number on a date set by the United Nations, given that some countries don't have full census data?

"The world's population will hit seven billion on Oct. 31. Or maybe not until next year. Or maybe it has already happened.

"No one knows for sure. But that hasn't stopped the United Nations from picking the last day of the month as the symbolic date, christening it as 7 Billion Day."

Perhaps the occasion will allow us to realize that we need to pay more attention to better tracking our growth and impact - our literal footprint on Earth. For some, there will be the typical celebrations: a baby wrapped in a blanket declared the 7 billionth person to enter this world as hospitals debate which baby was actually the one that hit the marker, similar to what has happened with milestones in the past.  (If you're curious where you fall in the mix, Population Action International has a handy "What's your number?" interactive based on your birth date.)

But it seems like this time around, if social media and traditional media are any indication, this milestone is about a little more than just balloons and fanfare. The Wall Street Journal wrote:

"While seven billion is a nice round number, knowing the identity of the lucky baby or the exact moment the threshold is crossed isn't really any more important than pulling over to the side of the road to bask in your car's 100,000th mile. But the building blocks for world population estimates — national demographic statistics and characteristics — are used by governments, businesses and aid groups to plan spending and spot potential trouble spots."

In a growing and ever-changing economic and technological world, this may be the time to look at where we've been, what we're going through now and what challenges lie ahead for such a massive population.

iReport: What does 7 billion look like

And with movements like Occupy Wall Street spreading across the globe to share growing discontent about government institutions' ability to deal with our problems and growing debt, the 7 billion mark poses questions about whether those concerns will be passed on to future generations.

"The milestone of 7 billion is marked by achievements, setbacks and paradoxes," a United Nations Population Fund report begins. (Read the report in PDF form)

The U.N. says it believes the world can thrive as it reaches the milestone, but the report also looks at the ways that countries are growing and changing, as well as how they can tackle critical challenges and prepare for the arrival of billions more people this century. Those challenges include empowering young people with economic opportunities; planning for the growth of cities; developing programs to share and sustain the Earth's resources; and improving education, including sexual education.

The U.N. has teamed up with the company SAP to help make those decisions easier by creating a widget on the site 7billionactions.org that allows you to assess the world's population by age, socioeconomic status and education levels, and to compare trends from country to country. The goal is to help governments assess their needs for the future.

After all, with more people comes the need for more resources.

Jeffrey D. Sachs, the director of The Earth Institute at Columbia University, writing for CNN, says the occasion marks a huge task for us.

"The arrival of the 7 billionth person is cause for profound global concern. It carries a challenge: What will it take to maintain a planet in which each person has a chance for a full, productive and prosperous life, and in which the planet's resources are sustained for future generations?

"How, in short, can we enjoy 'sustainable development' on a very crowded planet?"

That crowded planet may cause some global issues. Those include the health concerns caused by the waste that 7 billion people create, according to a LiveScience report on MSNBC.com.

MSNBC's photo blog takes a visual look at the effect that we have on the world each day and how we tax the environment: through deforestation, pollution from developing countries and traffic jams, as well as the struggle to cultivate all of the food and crops necessary to feed our growing population. That imprint will only grow as more of us inhabit the planet, the accompanying article says.

And Roger Martin's article in the UK's Guardian newspaper says the growing population could cost us the planet we live on in the way we now know it.

"Every additional person needs food, water and energy, and produces more waste and pollution, so ratchets up our total impact on the planet, and ratchets down everyone else's share – the rich far more than the poor. By definition, total impact and consumption are worked out by measuring the average per person multiplied by the number of people. Thus all environmental (and many economic and social) problems are easier to solve with fewer people, and ultimately impossible with ever more."

"On a finite planet, the optimum population providing the best quality of life for all, is clearly much smaller than the maximum, permitting bare survival. The more we are, the less for each; fewer people mean better lives.

TV One in New Zealand took a look at the meaning of the number, but from the perspective of the tax burden it may bring on a growing population of aging people.

"Richard Bedford, an expert on population changes from Waikato University, told TV ONE's Breakfast, that young taxpayers' ability to cope is 'the big $64,000 question.'

"By 2030, more than a third of the population in a number of Western countries will be aged over 65."

For some, the projection has come with gloom and doom and questions of "are we prepared?" for the population growth ahead.

A National Geographic cover story from January, titled "Population 7 Billion," examined the history behind the global moment and fascination with how well and how long our civilization can continue to coexist with our surroundings.

"For centuries population pessimists have hurled apocalyptic warnings at the congenital optimists, who believe in their bones that humanity will find ways to cope and even improve its lot. History, on the whole, has so far favored the optimists, but history is no certain guide to the future. Neither is science," Robert Kunzig wrote. "It cannot predict the outcome of People v. Planet, because all the facts of the case — how many of us there will be and how we will live — depend on choices we have yet to make and ideas we have yet to have."

soundoff (778 Responses)
  1. CorruptUS

    wow....not in a good way. Makes me wonder if I should even have children, or they and their children will face potential economic/global destabilization worse than it is now during their lifetimes, environmental hardships and an increase in the already staggering number of starving people in this world as we are already over-populated. We announce this as a good thing? I see it as humans being irresponsible. Would we be doing our children and their children a service by capping the amount of children any person can have in a lifetime? Simply put, yes!

    October 26, 2011 at 1:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • C. T. Wafer

      I never had children, by choice and have never looked back.

      October 26, 2011 at 1:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • Sasha

      Make sure you're certain about that decision. Realize that should you have the "urge" to reproduce, you can always work with children and/or adopt, which is a far better choice. Ask yourself if that is a good compromise for you and then, trust yourself and make the decision.
      I decided not to have children; never regreted it (I am 42 now). There is so much to life you just need to have the courage to explore it.

      October 26, 2011 at 2:46 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jolene

      I just had 1 daughter and she is now 25, she has 2 kids 4 and 5 months and what is this World going to be when they her age? I won't be around to see but I have a pretty good idea and the thought makes me sick!!!

      October 26, 2011 at 4:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • Chaiah

      Great post. Neither of my daughters are going to have biological children and my husband and myself are extremely proud of both of them for making the decision to adopt or simply help children who could benefit from a loving caretaker/parent figure. The population of Earth has doubled – plus some since I was born. For those who are religious and believe that we are supposed to procreate – what about the responsibility we have to care for our planet, and that includes not overpopulating it. People like the Duggars are a disgrace... I wonder how many needy children they are willing to adopt... and give this planet a bit of a breather.

      October 26, 2011 at 10:36 pm | Report abuse |
  2. phoenix

    i am a serious bible student me and my fellow new jerusalemers will be outta here soon,, this isn t the natural human race God created this is a race of beliademonic] and the ghouls are getting scarier every day. amen

    October 26, 2011 at 1:26 pm | Report abuse |
  3. poiuytre

    Where the hell did they come up with the date of Oct. 31? Is there a contest to give birth to the 7 billionth Halloween baby?

    October 26, 2011 at 1:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jackie

      They'll probably get some sort of an award

      October 26, 2011 at 1:27 pm | Report abuse |
  4. MaryM

    I blame it on you, you pos.

    October 26, 2011 at 1:26 pm | Report abuse |
  5. Jackie

    Did anyone stop to think that infertility is natures way of slowing down population growth? Take away all those little "advances" and we might start to get somewhere. Let's look at "octomom"-8 kids in one in vitro session; Kate Gosslin-what was it, 6? If women want to have an abortion, LET THEM. I think families should not be allowed to have more then 2 children, to replace them when they are gone. Make contraceptives more accessible to all women.

    October 26, 2011 at 1:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • Myles

      Nuclear physics + humans is nature's way of dealing with the population. It's only a matter of time.

      October 26, 2011 at 1:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mike

      It all about culture. If you can afford a large family, its not a problem. However, when you have no way of supporting yourself, you should not have children. The third world is were the over popluation. This overpopulation discussion pertains to the third world. Not the US or Europe.

      October 26, 2011 at 3:44 pm | Report abuse |
  6. oregonTom

    Wear a condom.

    October 26, 2011 at 1:28 pm | Report abuse |
  7. Ryan

    We cannot possibly sustain this many people with the idealized "American" quality of life – it isn't possible

    There are too many people and not enough resources, and the poor will continue to get poorer and hit the hardest

    We truly need a limit of children to 2 or even 1 child per couple as a basis, through incentives and taxation or even by law.

    October 26, 2011 at 1:28 pm | Report abuse |
  8. Keneth

    Something else to keep Right Wing Wacko's up at night.

    October 26, 2011 at 1:28 pm | Report abuse |
  9. John Kanyi-KENYA

    Ok, in Kenya we are yearning for the Guiness World Record, the 7th Bnth human. Pumwani, KNH, Karatina ...we hope to be counted.

    October 26, 2011 at 1:28 pm | Report abuse |
  10. Chris

    Just kill yourself, you won't have to worry about anything anymore.

    October 26, 2011 at 1:28 pm | Report abuse |
  11. Davey Jones

    I wonder how many countries lie about their population just to scare their neighbours into not attacking them.

    October 26, 2011 at 1:28 pm | Report abuse |
  12. Dan

    "For some, there will be the typical celebrations: a baby wrapped in a blanket declared the 7 billionth person to enter this world"....that would be true if everyone was immortal.

    at this point in time, there is no way to know how many of us are on this planet, which is why this is a crap article. i find myself on cnn.com less and less each week.

    October 26, 2011 at 1:29 pm | Report abuse |
  13. Bob

    I hope humanity finds some way to curb their growth rate. We struggle with the amount of people we have in the world already, I don't see why we need more millions of people.

    Luckily Canada is still under populated. The thought of being in an over-crowded craphole of a country and not being able to walk 2 feet without bumping into someone is very unappealing.

    October 26, 2011 at 1:29 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Phosphorus

    I'll volunteer to be one of the first humans to go to Mars, and report my findings back to the Earth until I die. It's a pretty important job, and I am asking for zero pay.

    October 26, 2011 at 1:30 pm | Report abuse |
  15. Ike Minehead

    How big a number is 7 billion? It's as many people as there are seconds...in 221 years and 298 days. One person for each second that has elapsed since early January 1790.

    October 26, 2011 at 1:31 pm | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28