Very interesting because ancient Egyptians relied on periodic flooding to renew their farms' soil. Of course it was a different time and circumstance. What do farmers do when their topsoil is washed away?

@RussRAB If they are lucky they can sell and move, start a new life in a city. Farmland with no topsoil is essentially parking lot.... where no one parks because it is in the middle of nowhere. Most of the farmers are mortgaged to the hilt. Not a good time.

Jeez.. you are one depressing fellow in the morning.

@bigpawbullets Hell no! I'm feeling great. 2nd cup of coffee; birds singing in the garden...

..but I'm a 45 year retired environmental science teacher who likes to "wake and shake" those who get complacent about our environment.

I"m an optimist; I think EV's, alternative energy, and ZPG is just around the corner....

So thanks for your concern; I'm not depressed...but we need to get busy treating our soil better.

@Robecology
Ha! My comment was about your ability to depress me.

wish a lot more people would get on board with the science....
and....not for nuthin'....but I'm getting a little tired of people not being able to distinguish the difference between being "negative" from being a realist.

@Robecology
Have to agree with you Rob.

You forgot to mention the bad news is that we are not slowing down with our numbers and increasing need for dirt.

@Lavergne Far too many are willing to see negative news as "Doom and Gloom" and jump on the "Smile and Denial" bandwagen. I prefer to see it as a "Know and Grow" opportunity.

@JackPedigo I think we are "slowing down" with "our numbers"...conservation of topsoil is up. population growth rate is lowering (but will remain a "growth rate for several decades to come...but the rate itself is slowing down). So I'm optimistic we'll "fix this".

@Robecology I am not. Even if it were to stop today the momentum will mean we still keep adding more and more of us. Now, instead of 100 million net we have some 85 million net per annum. This was a big topic of discussion in ZPG and still is with population demographers.

@JackPedigo Your point isn't clear. "No I'm not"...what? Not "slowing down"? The statistics support what I'm saying; that we are, in fact, slowing down our growth rate. We're still growing; but much slower. And the slowdown should result in ZPG by the latter part of this century.

[ourworldindata.org]

It's true we are still adding to the population; 158 more births, than deaths, per minute; but this number is much lower than the rate was when it peaked in the 1960's.

True; we do increase 83-85 million per year; but that number was much higher decades ago; and we are slowing that down. Don't take my word for it; check the stats...be agnostic..

[poodwaddle.com]

@Robecology My point is we don't have until the end of the century. How many more billion people are we talking about? We can't even handle the present population and whenever the population starts to decline all the economists scream about a birth dearth. With them it's always the same story; a growing economy is paramount.