Overpopulation in Star Trek

[Baffalo]

A little brainbug I had this morning. The population of Earth is already near 7 billion people, mostly in Asia. While some populations such as China have instigated One Child laws, in other nations there are no limits on how many children you can have. If this trend held true, then the population around the time of 2063 would be very, very high, near the 8 or 9, possibly 10 billion mark. Taking Riker's comment about WWIII, that would mean 0.3 billion (300 million) died during the war. So that leaves... maybe 9.7 billion for a high mark? So if the Vulcans came and discovered Earth, they'd no doubt help to rebuild after the war, providing help to build warp capable ships and all. But unless the number of ships built can carry the growing population off-world as fast as they reproduce, that would mean eventually, the population of Earth would hit its maximum.

Even with replicators, food for huge populations is a major concern, as is housing, clothing, medical care, everything that the Federation government is supposed to provide, at least from what we've gathered. So could Starfleet, at some point, issued its own one-child policy? The reason I say this is we rarely, if ever, see more than one child in each family. Jake Sisko, Molly O'Brian, Wesley Crusher, Rene Picard. Now sure, we also saw that Picard had a brother, but is it possible that the policy came at some point between when Picard was born and the present? Or is this just a case of only wanting one kid per family to keep it from getting bogged down?

[Eternal_Freedom]

A minor nitpick, but Riker said it was six hundred million dead from the war alone. Most likely there would have been many more dead with most of the major cities destroyed and few governments left.

Indeed, the First Contact novelisation describes this in some detail from Lily's perspective. Her mother gets cancer, which should be an easily treatable diesease by then, but there is no medicine to treat it so she dies. Lily also describes not liking living in cold Montana, but everywhere warm is either riddled with typhus or still sizzling from the nukes.

Also, I wonder if people would even continue having children in this bleak post apocalyptic world.

[Baffalo]

A minor nitpick, but Riker said it was six hundred million dead from the war alone. Most likely there would have been many more dead with most of the major cities destroyed and few governments left.

Indeed, the First Contact novelisation describes this in some detail from Lily's perspective. Her mother gets cancer, which should be an easily treatable diesease by then, but there is no medicine to treat it so she dies. Lily also describes not liking living in cold Montana, but everywhere warm is either riddled with typhus or still sizzling from the nukes.

Also, I wonder if people would even continue having children in this bleak post apocalyptic world.

Thank you about the six hundred million. Got it wrong in my head.

I meant overpopulation in Picard's time though.

[Srelex]

With colonies on the moon and all over the solar system alone? It's not really a realistic issue.

[Eternal_Freedom]

Well by then they've had, what, 300 years to expand outwards to the galaxy? Most likely they took a massive hit in population, and another massive hit a generation after WWIII, and then began to expand outwards with help from the Vulcans.

By Picard's time it clearly isn't a problem, or it would have been mentioned on-screen.

In DS9 "Statistical Probabilities" we have Bashir and co's estimate that the war will cause something like 900 billion deaths. Obviously not all human but clearly that is seen as a large portion of the Federation's population, and those 900 billion are most certainly not all on Earth.

[Connor MacLeod]

the OP assumes that ST-Earth develops exactly/precisely along the same lines as RL earth. Which may or may not be the case.

[Crateria]

the OP assumes that ST-Earth develops exactly/precisely along the same lines as RL earth. Which may or may not be the case.

If ENT is canon, then the point of divergence is unknown, but the Iraq War is still there as it went in our time line (I think).
.

[Connor MacLeod]

Um, I'm pretty sure it's not. We've had commentary on the whole Eugenics War and those like Khan going back to the 90s I'm pretty sure. That alone tends to suggest a pretty hefty divergence from our timeline, since we haven't yet mastered the "genetically engineered supermen" technology yet. Maybe you can bookmark this with something from Star Trek IV, but we didn't see enough of that Earth to make extensive guesses about the limits of their technology.

Furthermore you're assuming there's only a single timeline point of divergence from us, rather than a whole bunch of little things culminating in one big divergence.

[B5B7]

Also, the OP makes the untenable assumption that India, Africa, etc are still population growth hellholes, whereas as seen in real world, nations will eventually stop their extreme population growth (if human measures don't have effect, then nature takes a hand with epidemics and crop failures, leading to megadeaths). Most modern societies end up adopting birth control as a normal action by people.
The economic (poverty) and religious (Catholic church, etc) motivations that cause extreme population growth will generally disappear over the coming centuries.

Also the extreme population growth is a modern anomaly of the 20th century - populations were much smaller in all previous centuries. Sure there would have been periods of growth but not on the scale of the late 20th century. So where rapid population growth occurred, it would have been from a relatively small base population, and where a big population got bigger, it would have been slowly.
The rapid expansion of a large base population as with India and some other nations is exceptional, [note: other nations have had large growths eg USA, from 0 non-Amerindian presence to 300 million - but still slower than India as over 2 centuries, not 50 years; but the growth slows down eventually , as it has; hopefully same will happen with India and other nations of its region).

[Connor MacLeod]

I would also think that they pretty much had ot have had better luck and research/money invested in space travel than we do - I simply don't think Cochrane's efforts could have materialized out of thin air. Indeed, I would imagine the building of that first warp-capable starship would have quite a bit to say about the resources and infrastructure of ST-Earth at and around that time (and it would bound to be quite a bit different from our Earth.)

[TC Pilot]

It's worth mentioning that in Wrath of Khan, Dr. Marcus mentions the problems of overpopulation and food supply in the video proposal for Genesis as reasons to fund the project.

[Boeing 757]

Even with replicators available, and space travel at their disposal, we are left wondering how affordable space-travel is for the common citizens, and how much it could cost some one to become established on one of the Federation's colony-worlds. Just because it is within its reach of building such things, it does not mean that it can invest the resources to do so at any practical cost. Building more colonies and such may pull needed resources away from building other needed capital such as starships and shipyards and so forth for the member planets, and thus would mean that there are simply not enough materials to make an endless amount of colonies. That in itself may set a limit on how many colonies could be constructed.

If I recall right, the Federation is constituted of some 1,000 colonies and 150 member-planets. I wonder what the average population of such colonies may be, and also what is needed both to settle occupants and to operate these habitats in the long run. I don't believe that they are all too large, and there seems not to be an great stream of settlers and people that live in space-habitats. If that is the case, I bet that most of the population of the Federation still dwells on its member-worlds, and that it is not a case of free movement around the Federation at no high cost as some would have us believe. The member-worlds could still become overpopulated if this is in deed the case.

As for replicators, they may be wholly scarce and available only to starships owing to constraints in cost of usage and energy-demands. We know that there is still a hefty demand for authentic unreplicated foodstuffs, so the replicator is not as common among the Federaton's citizenry as some Trek fans would want us to believe.

There are too many unknowns overall so that we could determine to what degree the Federation is overpopulated, but I am willing to bet that it hasn't as a whole solved all of its issues of scarcity because of cost and resource-allocation in implementing such solutions. That is just my 2 cents.

[Baffalo]

Even with replicators available, and space travel at their disposal, we are left wondering how affordable space-travel is for the common citizens, and how much it could cost some one to become established on one of the Federation's colony-worlds. Just because it is within its reach of building such things, it does not mean that it can invest the resources to do so at any practical cost. Building more colonies and such may pull needed resources away from building other needed capital such as starships and shipyards and so forth for the member planets, and thus would mean that there are simply not enough materials to make an endless amount of colonies. That in itself may set a limit on how many colonies could be constructed.

If I recall right, the Federation is constituted of some 1,000 colonies and 150 member-planets. I wonder what the average population of such colonies may be, and also what is needed both to settle occupants and to operate these habitats in the long run. I don't believe that they are all too large, and there seems not to be an great stream of settlers and people that live in space-habitats. If that is the case, I bet that most of the population of the Federation still dwells on its member-worlds, and that it is not a case of free movement around the Federation at no high cost as some would have us believe. The member-worlds could still become overpopulated if this is in deed the case.

As for replicators, they may be wholly scarce and available only to starships owing to constraints in cost of usage and energy-demands. We know that there is still a hefty demand for authentic unreplicated foodstuffs, so the replicator is not as common among the Federaton's citizenry as some Trek fans would want us to believe.

There are too many unknowns overall so that we could determine to what degree the Federation is overpopulated, but I am willing to bet that it hasn't as a whole solved all of its issues of scarcity because of cost and resource-allocation in implementing such solutions. That is just my 2 cents.

This is one of the limitations of a money-less economy. You no longer keep track of resources on a single monetary basis and instead must account for each individual item going in and out. X tons of ore going to this facility yields Y pieces of pre-fab shelter which can house so many people. Without money, you have to account for all that. And with no real incentive to work extra hard, you can't exactly crack the whip. So you're going to have a set input and output, which caps your overall production. Now, if you've played Birth of the Federation, you know that it costs resources to build a colony fleet, you have to protect it to its destination, and when it lands, you have to invest time and resources into helping it prosper. Now sure, eventually that colony may pay off in terms of resources, but that's assuming the population is either large enough or you're willing to invest in the materials needed to make the venture worthwhile. A world might be a literal hell-pit, but if it lets you build an outpost near your enemy's border, then that's a worthwhile investment, because it serves as a launch point. Or the world might be a good place to mine dilithium. It just depends.

[Darth Tanner]

we are left wondering how affordable space-travel is for the common citizens

Family members and civilians seem to have no trouble getting as far out as Deep Space Nine from Earth.

thus would mean that there are simply not enough materials to make an endless amount of colonies

Obviously there isn’t going to be an endless supply of colonies as there is a lack of class M planets and tereforming appears to be very time consuming. But there can't be that much of a restriction on them seeing things like the Scotland planet where even stone buildings were transplanted from Earth can happen and even enjoy a planet wide weather control system.

From the list of colonies here link there appears to be quite a wide variety of types of colonies. The Melon colony for example is dropped off by the Enterprise itself with additional supplies trickling in afterwards. However the Bersallis colony is only 600 odd people so they do appear to be rather small scale, at least initially.

However I don't see why this should be surprising, without economic or political motivation few people are willing to leave their family and friends to start a new life without any of the luxuries afforded by living on a highly developed world.

As for replicators, they may be wholly scarce and available only to starships

We see many civilians having them aboard Deep Space Nine and other freighters. DS9 is also a Cardassian design so if the Cardies can afford to be putting replicators in commoners living rooms I’d imagine they can’t be that scarce.

[Baffalo]

As for replicators, they may be wholly scarce and available only to starships

We see many civilians having them aboard Deep Space Nine and other freighters. DS9 is also a Cardassian design so if the Cardies can afford to be putting replicators in commoners living rooms I’d imagine they can’t be that scarce.

In theory, once you have one replicator, 20, you make it produce another replicator, 21, then you have the two produce two more 22 and then the four produce four more 23 and so on until you produce as many as you want 2n.

[Darth Tanner]

In theory, once you have one replicator, 20, you make it produce another replicator, 21, then you have the two produce two more 22 and then the four produce four more 23 and so on until you produce as many as you want 2n.

Only if the doubtless complicated replicator components can be replicated and also only if your original replicator is big enough to replicate one, your second generation replicator would have to be either replicated by component and then assembled or made smaller than the original.

Also you have to have the power supply to keep them all running!

[Baffalo]

In theory, once you have one replicator, 20, you make it produce another replicator, 21, then you have the two produce two more 22 and then the four produce four more 23 and so on until you produce as many as you want 2n.

Only if the doubtless complicated replicator components can be replicated and also only if your original replicator is big enough to replicate one, your second generation replicator would have to be either replicated by component and then assembled or made smaller than the original.

Also you have to have the power supply to keep them all running!

I do wonder what the power consumption is for a replicator. It must be pretty big.

[Enigma]

Replicators are not rare. We know that they exist onboard starships in crew quarters and in the case of the Galaxy Class, a replicating center (remember when Worf and Data were trying to find a wedding gift for Miles and Keiko). They've even got portable replicators and industrial replicators. DS9 has public replicators in case someone needed a quick bite or drink.

I'm quite sure that Starfleet Command and the Academy have replicators too.

But I do think that not every home would have one simply for two reasons (other than personal ones like Sisko's dad and Picard's brother), one is the quantity of bulk matter needed and second, the unknown energy requirements to power the replicators.

Then again, the power requirements could be mitigated by limiting the number of energy intensive items to basic stuff or simply limit to foodstuffs. For example, you want steak? Then instead of the replicator making you a steak on a plate, you'd place a plate into the replicator and the steak will appear on it. That way the replicator wouldn't use the transporter technology to create the plate, thus reducing power needed.

[Baffalo]

In "The Survivors", they offered to leave a replicator for the two people there, though that's perhaps because they couldn't possibly share one anymore.

But interesting is they said they had a little fusion generator in their basement!

I keep a stack of fission batteries in case I need to run a lamp for a few hundred years.

[Glimmervoid]

There's some evidence for ubiquitous replicators. This for example, from The Wounded.

(mealtime for the newly-weds)
O'BRIEN: What is it?
KEIKO: Kelp buds, plankton loaf and sea berries.
O'BRIEN: Sweetheart, I'm not a fish.
KEIKO: It's very healthy. I had this every morning when I was growing up.
O'BRIEN: What? No muffins or oatmeal, or corned beef and eggs?
KEIKO: For breakfast?
O'BRIEN: Keiko, I've been thinking You've been introducing me to all this wonderful food that you're accustomed to. I'd like to do the same. Isn't that what marriage is about? Sharing?
KEIKO: What kind of foods?
O'BRIEN Scalloped potatoes, mutton shanks, oxtails and cabbage.
KEIKO: Kind of heavy.
O'BRIEN: Oh, you'll love it, I promise. I can still remember the aromas when my mother was cooking.
KEIKO: She cooked?
O'BRIEN: She didn't believe in a replicator. She thought real food was more nutritious.
KEIKO: She handled real meat? She touched it and cut it?
O'BRIEN: Yeah, like a master chef. She was fantastic. Of course, I'll have to use the replicator, but I'll make something special for you tonight. You'll love it, I promise.
KEIKO: Okay. Maybe I'll have something special for you, tonight, too.
(weapons fire)
O'BRIEN: Something's wrong.
COMPUTER: Red alert. Take emergency stations.

[Zoul]

In the future history of Star Trek they killed off billions of people before they got to the Utopia of the Federation. The Eugenics wars and World War III kill billions. The Eugenic Wars are said to have ''bombed whole populations out of existence'', and WWIII nearly returned Earth to a Stone Age type planet and caused a nuclear winter. So that by the 22nd century Earth's population was greatly reduced. You could even say it was 'easy' to from the planet wide Utopia with only so few people to care for...

Note also that the Federation keeps everything small. Take colonies for example. We never see any big colonies, and when they go to a planet apparently the whole colony is just one town. They speak of the planet 'Alpha 9' and the colony 'Alpha 9' interchangeably. And we just about never hear about 'New New York' on the colony of 'Alpha 9' on the planet 'Yobic'.

We have seen dozens of Earth like planets, and any one of them could be a farm planet. If the average colony only covers a couple miles of an Earth sized planet, that leaves thousands of miles for farms.

[Cesario]

But I do think that not every home would have one simply for two reasons (other than personal ones like Sisko's dad and Picard's brother), one is the quantity of bulk matter needed and second, the unknown energy requirements to power the replicators.

I'm not sure that I agree with the "bulk matter" concept as it's commonly presumed around here to be the way Replicators work. In Voyager: Year of Hell, we get a subplot about a old style pocket watch. Chacotay replicated it for her before the crisis, and she was adamant that he recycle it, noting that doing so would mean another meal for someone, or a hypospray. Now, I don't know what you guys eat, but that watch looked like it was made of a lot more metal than I generally like in my cheese sandwiches.

If we are talking about needing bulk mass, it clearly isn't in the "you need to have food to make food" situation, since apparently a copper and glass watch could be turned into a meal, and be expected to provide more energy by recycling it than the process of breaking it down would have cost them.

[Enigma]

But I do think that not every home would have one simply for two reasons (other than personal ones like Sisko's dad and Picard's brother), one is the quantity of bulk matter needed and second, the unknown energy requirements to power the replicators.

I'm not sure that I agree with the "bulk matter" concept as it's commonly presumed around here to be the way Replicators work. In Voyager: Year of Hell, we get a subplot about a old style pocket watch. Chacotay replicated it for her before the crisis, and she was adamant that he recycle it, noting that doing so would mean another meal for someone, or a hypospray. Now, I don't know what you guys eat, but that watch looked like it was made of a lot more metal than I generally like in my cheese sandwiches.

If we are talking about needing bulk mass, it clearly isn't in the "you need to have food to make food" situation, since apparently a copper and glass watch could be turned into a meal, and be expected to provide more energy by recycling it than the process of breaking it down would have cost them.

I guess "bulk matter" won't be much of a problem. I kinda realized that they could use their own garbage and so forth for replicator material.

[Baffalo]

But I do think that not every home would have one simply for two reasons (other than personal ones like Sisko's dad and Picard's brother), one is the quantity of bulk matter needed and second, the unknown energy requirements to power the replicators.

I'm not sure that I agree with the "bulk matter" concept as it's commonly presumed around here to be the way Replicators work. In Voyager: Year of Hell, we get a subplot about a old style pocket watch. Chacotay replicated it for her before the crisis, and she was adamant that he recycle it, noting that doing so would mean another meal for someone, or a hypospray. Now, I don't know what you guys eat, but that watch looked like it was made of a lot more metal than I generally like in my cheese sandwiches.

If we are talking about needing bulk mass, it clearly isn't in the "you need to have food to make food" situation, since apparently a copper and glass watch could be turned into a meal, and be expected to provide more energy by recycling it than the process of breaking it down would have cost them.

I guess "bulk matter" won't be much of a problem. I kinda realized that they could use their own garbage and so forth for replicator material.

There's also the possibility that they mass-produce organic material for no other use than as bulk material. Crops such as corn and wheat are no doubt still necessary, but there are countless plants out there that grow insanely fast in a variety of climates that are useless for human consumption, such as fast growing grasses. There's also the waste from corn and wheat, that which isn't used for manufacturing. Not to mention bacteria that can be grown in large cisterns. All of this can be used by the replicators as bulk material. In fact, given that you can re-purpose almost anything, there's essentially no trash to worry about. Everything used in the manufacturing process can be broken down and used yet again. It'd certainly make the environmentalists happy.

And as far as energy is concerned, there's enough deuterium in the world's oceans to supply earth indefinitely. With fusion power, you have all the energy you want, which means you can distill water in regions with no natural aquifers, you can condense it from the atmosphere, anything you want to ensure adequate water, which is a definite commodity. Steel and heavier metals will no doubt become less and less common as lighter weight aluminum and titanium become easier to obtain and manufacture. Hell, the only reason we haven't entered the Aluminum Age now is because the cost to refine aluminum makes steel cost-effective, despite aluminum's relative abundance on the surface. If you wanted, I'm sure you could go roaming the woods, stumble across an old pile of rusted cars, and they could recycle every component simply by breaking it down into its base elements.