Yeah. SUSTAINABILITY has become nothing more than a marketing tool. Another abused hype word that I despise is ORGANIC. Somehow these two words are often used together and completely out of context by really dumb people. Oh and also ECO- as is ecosystem or ecology or ECOSUSTAINABLEORGANIC processes that were employed in the development of this post.

"The optimum population for Australia is said to be between 10 – 13 million".

This would make the sustainable population of the world about 1bn. What do we do with the other 6bn.

Australia with the lowest population density per arable hectare is more suited for immigration than anyone else. This can be demonstrated by the massive surplus in food production despite the low intensity of the farming.

Mr Right has not only got the unemployment wrong, but has sucked out the 5% underemployed from a left wing mouthpiece. In order to justify his xenophobia.

Democritus,

Australia does have a lot of arable land per person, but there are serious issues with the quality of the soil and the availability of water. There is very little land that is both highly fertile and well watered. We had to import grain in 2007 because of the strong drought conditions. I believe that even in a good year we don't produce as much as France. This map shows wheat production around the world

http://www.gramene.org/species/triticum/wheat_maps_and_stats.html

Yabby, who is a farmer in real life, raised some very important issues about the sustainability of continuing this production with global supplies of potash and phosphate running out, let alone supplies of oil to run the farm machinery and make into pesticides and fertilisers.

There are also issues with current and past unsustainable farming practices, which are effectively mining the soil. If the politicians from the 1920s had insisted that the natural vegetation had been left on half the land near the Murray river, we wouldn't have the current salt problems.

You are also ignoring future risk from climate change.

Obviously Australia could support a larger population at a Bangladeshi standard of living. Not wanting that doesn't make Mr. Right xenophobic.

As other posters have pointed out, there is no point harping on about sustainability until the issue of population growth has been addressed. Until our political and business leaders recognise this elephant in the room, sustainability will remain a pipe dream.

As it stands, Australia's population is growing at a rate faster than that of most Third World countries, largely due to record high levels of immigration. This population explosion is occuring in a deceptively large country, where the vast majority of its residents are essentially crammed into a few coastal strips, the ongoing expansion of which is destroying the best remaining arable land. In terms of its natural resource base (fresh water, fertile soil), Australia is already living beyond its carrying capacity. Yet our population continues to grow, driven by an immigration intake two to three times higher, in per capita terms, than that of the USA.

Despite this, some (such as Democritus) believe that Australia can and should hold a significantly larger population, even if it means degrading the natural, social, cultural and economic environment for present and future generations.

My question: Why? What is there to gain from overpopulating Australia and ruining our environment, our society and our quality of life?

Some questions for the Rudd Government about its recent decision to dramatically increase Australia's already high immigration intake:

• How does increasing our population by more than a million every three years make our climate change/greenhouse emission problem easier to solve?

• Every city in Australia is water stressed. How does increasing our population by an additional 5% every three years make our urban water problem easier to solve?

• It is doubtful whether in a climate changed, post peak oil world Australia can maintain water supply to its farmers. How does such rapid population growth make it easier to maintain our rivers, soils and food production?

• Australians have one of the highest per capita environmental impacts in the world. An increase in the Australian population has a larger global impact than the addition of a person just about anywhere else in the world. How does the Rudd Government morally justify increasing Australia’s demand on the global environment at the expense of many peoples far less well off?

• Australia has an acute housing shortage. More and more Australians cannot afford the rising price of a house or rent. One of the main drivers of this situation has been clearly identified as our already high immigration intake. How does Kevin Rudd justify making this situation even worse for ‘working families’?

• Australia has approximately 5% unemployment and another 5% of under employment. How does the Rudd Government justify bringing in unskilled workers when there are Australians unemployed and underemployed seeking work?

• There is a rapidly growing global food shortage. Increasing Australia’s population is leading to more and more high quality, well watered, food producing land going under housing and related urban infrastructure. Where is Kevin Rudd’s much advertised Christian morality?

As Dr John Coulter, President of Sustainable Population Australia notes, the Rudd Government's decision to ramp up immigration has exposed the hollowness of its claims to be concerned about environmental sustainability and social equity. The Rudd Government is running the biggest immigration program in Australia's history, at a time when our environment and society can least cope.

http://www.population.org.au/

Divergence,

Your map shows that Aus does not produce as much wheat as France, but more than Germany with populations 3x and 4x as large respectively.

Considering that Aus has no agricultural subsidies and far fewer farmers that is not bad.

With more intensive agriculture, production can easily be increased. In 1950 India had a population of 400m and had to import food. Now it has a population of 1100m and exports food, thanks to technology.