The world in 2026

welsh

Junkmaster
In 1968, they thought that we'd be building giant space ships to travel to jupiter, but the world would be on the brink of nuclear apocalypse between the ideologies of China, the Soviet Union and the US.

Such is the business of predicting the future-

Here's what the economist thinks the world's economy will look like-

IR2.jpg



The world in 2026
From The World in 2006 print edition
Who will be number one?

The world has changed a lot since our first edition, The World in 1987: no Berlin Wall, no Soviet Union, a single superpower. China’s rise is a safe bet to be one of the most important developments over the next 20 years. By 2026, will China—assuming it stays in one piece—be the world’s biggest economy?

Yes and no. If countries’ economies are measured using market exchange rates (the rates at which firms trade and repatriate profits), in 2026 America will remain comfortably the world’s number one, according to long-range forecasts by the Economist Intelligence Unit. It will still account for more than one-quarter of global output, twice as much as second-placed China, which will itself have comfortably overtaken Japan.

But when countries are compared using purchasing-power parity rates (PPP), which adjust for price differences between countries and reflect the actual buying power of local income, China overtakes America in about 2017. Though far from perfect, PPP is a better way of comparing economic size. By this measure, in 2026 India will be the third-biggest economy, well behind America but far ahead of Japan. Indeed, by then youthful India will be growing faster than an ageing China.

And Europe? It will be in relative decline, whichever way you measure it. The 25-country EU will drop from 31% of global GDP in 2006 to 24% in 2026 (or, by the PPP calculation, from 21% to 16%). But the EU could have a way to reduce its weight-loss: adding big new members, such as Turkey, Ukraine and maybe one day even Russia

A world dominated by China, the US and India?

ANd the weather?

The weather in 2026
Philip Eden
From The World in 2006 print edition

The climate has changed since we first published, in 1986. How will it change over the next 20 years?

“How can you predict what the climate will be like in 20 years’ time when you can’t even get tomorrow’s forecast right?” That is the usual response from the layman to the climatologist expounding the latest theory on climate change.

Put it this way: forecasting tomorrow’s weather is a bit like estimating how much loose change you will have in your pocket or purse in 24 hours’ time. It is the result of many small transactions, often inter-related, most of them entirely predictable at such short range: a visit to the cashpoint, buying groceries, pocket-money for the kids, and so on. Foreshadowing changes in the climate over a long period is more akin to calculating the household budget over a year or more: the daily transactions hardly matter, whereas much more important are out-side influences, many of which are predictable but some of which may be quite unexpected.

Climatologists believe they understand most but not all of these “forcing factors” and are therefore able to make broad-brush, qualified assessments of where the world’s climate may go in coming decades.

We can get a feel for the direction the climate is taking by looking back 20 years. During that period the mean temperature of the lowest layer of the atmosphere, where human beings live, has increased by 0.4°C. The warming has not been even: the northern hemisphere has warmed more than the southern hemisphere, the continents more than the oceans, the polar fringes more than the core of the Arctic and Antarctic, and Europe more than North America. In Europe (excluding the Mediterranean basin) there were twice as many heat-related deaths in two weeks in August 2003 than there had been in the 20 previous years put together. In September 2005 both the geographical extent and the mean thickness of Arctic Ocean ice reached record low levels.

The warming seems to be accelerating. Computer models indicate a rise in temperature, averaged globally, of 0.5-1.0°C between 2006 and 2026. We can expect the hemispheric and continent/ocean differentials to continue, though not necessarily the transatlantic one, so substantial further warming is likely over both Europe and North America.

In the Arctic basin sea-ice may vanish altogether in the summer by the 2020s; this will probably generate a dynamic of its own. For the time being energy in the form of latent heat is absorbed throughout the summer by the melting process in the Arctic, maintaining cold conditions there and preventing the ocean temperature from climbing more than a degree or so above zero. If all the ice were routinely to disappear by late July, that energy absorption would halt, the Arctic Ocean would warm by several degrees, delaying the onset of ice formation in the autumn. The change in temperature distribution in the Arctic would also affect ocean currents in the Atlantic, which would in turn influence the atmospheric circulation in the region.

These knock-on effects are very difficult to model on the computer because we have no detailed measurements from previous such occurrences. However, one could postulate a poleward shift in the Atlantic depression track, and that would leave much of Europe—Scotland, Iceland and Norway excepted—with less rain in all seasons and much more prone to water shortages.

Tropical revolving storms (variously known as hurricanes, typhoons and cyclones) have been regarded as particularly sensitive to a changing global climate. These storms can develop only where the sea-surface temperature exceeds 26°C. Although their frequency has increased sharply, especially in the Atlantic/Caribbean, this may be part of a natural 60-year cycle: there were previous peaks in the 1880s and 1940s. Still, a warming climate will probably result in storms which are both longer-lasting and more intense, and which may develop in areas hitherto largely immune—offshore Brazil, for instance. And although their frequency may decrease between now and 2026 in line with the natural cycle, this may be partly offset by an extension of the season. Remember, too, that the coastal fringes threatened by these storms, from Texas to Taiwan, Florida to the Philippines, are increasingly urbanised and susceptible to huge human and economic losses.

Climate, it was once said, is average weather. That is not so. The climate of a given place is described by the extremes as well as the averages. Even if the world’s climate were static there would be dozens of natural disasters every year. With a rapidly changing climate, the next 20 years will be a white-knuckle ride: droughts, floods, heatwaves and hurricanes will probably occur more frequently (affecting regions that were previously untouched) and be longer-lasting. Even the mundane will change: in 2026 the ordinary day-to-day weather where you live will be different—almost certainly warmer, possibly drier but in other places possibly wetter—than it is today.
 
Doesn't matter.

We'll run out of oil in 2050 (or several years before that, if consumption increases the way it did so far) and the world economy will come to a full stop as mankind stands at the brink of destruction yet again.

But hey, several countries have announced that they'll have 50% of the energy production based on renewable ressources by then. So we'll only be 50% fucked. Yay.
 
Ashmo said:
We'll run out of oil in 2050
That just means that the more populated and larger populantion growing contries will be at the peak of the economic growth, thought the peak could be a steady decline vs. the sudden fall of all the others.
And remember, if the worst comes first, they can always eat each others. :twisted:
 
Ashmo said:
Doesn't matter.

We'll run out of oil in 2050 (or several years before that, if consumption increases the way it did so far) and the world economy will come to a full stop as mankind stands at the brink of destruction yet again.

But hey, several countries have announced that they'll have 50% of the energy production based on renewable ressources by then. So we'll only be 50% fucked. Yay.

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if by that time we were manufacturing an alternative that doesn't render the current system of manufacturing and transportation obsolescent. But you never know.
 
Well, we could recycle the dead.

Biomass can easily be recycled into natural resources. There's even a machine for that.
 
Ashmo said:
Well, we could recycle the dead.

Biomass can easily be recycled into natural resources. There's even a machine for that.

I'll have a Soylent Burger with some Soylent Fries and a Soylent Cola.
 
Lazarus Plus said:
I'll have a Soylent Burger with some Soylent Fries and a Soylent Cola.
Isn't that be a little dangerous, with the AIDS and all... but what the hell, it's your life, not mine. :twisted:
 
Bah, Graz'zt has a much more exciting theory of worldwide economic collapse due to oil depletion, in only ten years much less.
 
The famed Totenkatzenbenzinproduktiongerat?
Well there roshambo has a solution for what to do with all the wetbacks. Solve fuleshortage and imigration problem all in one machine. :twisted:
 
Judging by how good the US was at keeping its CIA gulags "secret"...

Ah, well, it'll work out for a while (maybe it already does?).
 
betwen 2015-2020 there will be mandatory fuel rationing of 20 gallons per week or less excepting economic need like transportation companies.

by 2050-2055 there wont be viable sources for oil. currently oil has a 30-1 ratio, shale oil is only 10-13 to 1... by 2020 the price of a 55 gal drum will be over $250 USD. by 2020 we will be lucky if its under $1500 USD.

you do the math.
 
Kotario said:
Bah, Graz'zt has a much more exciting theory of worldwide economic collapse due to oil depletion, in only ten years much less.
I love how the same families have been predicting the end of Capitalism for two hundred years now: first they where Radicals, then they where Marxists, then Maxist-Lenninists, then Titoists, then Social Democrats and now Red-Greens....always the same predictions, and always wrong everywhere save their own mind.
 
TorontRayne said:
Wow. The world is fucked. :(
Don't believe the little idiots. Humanity is fucked, but that has more to do with almost inevitable technological singularity then self destruction at this point. We've become too stable.
 
The end is near! :wink: . I just can't wait for everyone to start riding horses to work.
 
Didn't take long for this thread to jump the tracks.

I blame Lysenko. No, wait, it's Ashmo's fault.
 
Back
Top