Obviously, if human numbers and per
capita consumption continue to increase then that way lies disaster for humans and the planet.
Not exact matches
While in Hong Kong, its per
capita consumption is forecast to grow to 6 litres by 2020 but
consumption for super premium wine category will decline by 5.4 %, mainly affected by mainland's China's
continued anti-corruption drive, according to Deglise.
A key factor will be if the US consumer
continues increasing their per
capita consumption — soaking up much of the growing US production and preventing a large portion of product from entering export markets.
However, demand for edible goods will
continue to go up, mainly because improved living standards are causing per -
capita consumption to rise.
In the long run, much of the economic growth of developed economies is likely to involve less energy - intensive sectors because of demand - side factors such as 1) the amount of stuff people can physically manage is limited (even with rented storage space), 2) migration to areas where the weather is more moderate will
continue, 3) increased urbanization and population density reduces energy
consumption per
capita, 4) there is a lot of running room to decrease the energy
consumption of our electronic devices (e.g., switching to clockless microprocessors, not that I'm predicting that specific innovation), 5) telecommunication will substitute for transportation on the margin, 6) cheaper and better data acquisition and processing will enable less wasteful routing and warehousing of material goods, and 7) aging populations will eventually reduce the total amount (local plus distant) of travel per person per year.
When the law was written, most analysts assumed per
capita beef
consumption would
continue to grow as it had the previous several decades.
Even if it increases for population (i.e. population grows more slowly in future), any matching decrease in doubling time for per -
capita energy
consumption will offset that increase and CO2 emissions will therefore
continue to follow the curve.
Data from 22 countries shows the result: fewer resources per
capita and a
continued risk of famine in areas with low primary production — that is, the availability of carbon in the form of plant material for
consumption as food, fuel and feed.
Contrary to popular belief, these trends still
continue for both population and
consumption per
capita.
While per
capita emissions of developed countries appear to be stabilizing when measured within the country of production, this is largely due to the shift in the location of energy - intensive manufacturing to developing countries, and estimates of developed countries» per
capita emissions measured based on their
consumption show that they
continued to grow [122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130].