Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I seriously question the capacity of northern AU to support a much bigger population...
AS mentioned previously, simply the climate and poor soils preclude intensive agriculture,
Some exerpts from Wiki explains it pretty well
Quote :
"Although it comprises 45% of the total area of Australia, Northern Australia has only 5% of the Australian population (1.3 million in 2019)"
"The climate of the north of Australia ranges from arid (Köppen BWh) in the south to monsoonal (Köppen Aw) in the Top End and Kimberley. On the eastern coast, however, the climate is much more humid and ranges from humid sub-tropical (Köppen Cfa around Brisbane and Cwa further north) to humid tropical (Köppen Am and Af) in the Wet Tropics. Except in the western part of the Pilbara and Gascoyne where the heaviest rain often occurs from May to July under northwest cloudbands, rainfall is heavily concentrated in the "summer" months from November to March."
But here is the real issue - "the immense variability of the climate throughout the whole region. With the exception of the extreme north of the Northern Territory, rainfall variability throughout Northern Australia is quite markedly higher than most comparable climates in other continents. For example, at Charters Towers, the rainfall over the wet season can vary from less than 100 millimetres (3.9 in) in 1901/1902 to over 2,000 millimetres (79 in) in 1973/1974. The chief cause of this very high variability is erratic tropical cyclones, which occur from December to April and in many places can deliver as much as 350 millimetres (14 in) of rain over a day or two, causing extremely large floods in the region's rivers. For example, in April 1898, a tropical cyclone gave 740 millimetres (29 in) in one day at Whim Creek in the Pilbara, but for the whole of 1924 that same station recorded only 4 millimetres (0.16 in) for the whole year."
And of course the poor soils - "Except in the Lake Eyre Basin and adjacent areas to the east, the soils of Northern Australia are quite remarkable in global terms for their low fertility and difficulty of working. Most of them consist chiefly of hard laterite developed during period of climate much more humid than even that of Darwin today.
The extreme soil poverty of most of Northern Australia has the effect of confining large herbivores such as the kangaroo to the better soil in the dry grasslands since they cannot digest the extreme poor fodder from the northern monsoonal regions. However, the frequency of fires during the desiccating dry season from May to September means that forests cannot establish themselves except in sheltered places. This has created a unique type of tropical savanna environment in which fires play a crucial role in elevating the extremely low nutrient levels and aiding growth during the wet season."
And this - "Northern Australia faces major challenges to economic growth. Although the climate and soil poverty have defied all attempts to develop large-scale agriculture in large parts of Northern Australia, some agricultural and horticultural industries have seen strong growth. For example, in the Wet Tropics, mango, sugar cane and banana growing are major industries. Northern Australia produces more than 93% of Australia’s mangoes, more than 94% of Australia’s bananas, and more than 95% of Australia’s sugar. Sheep and beef cattle are also raised successfully across Northern Australia, usually on extremely large properties. Northern Australia accounts for 64% of Australia’s national beef cattle herd.
The geological factors that make Northern Australia's soils so unsuited to traditional agriculture, however, make it extremely rich in ores of abundant, insoluble lithophile metals such as aluminium, iron and uranium. It has the world's largest deposits of all these metals."
Personally, I'm all for the development of the northern regions of Australia, but I simply don't see it happening any time soon, not least of the reasons being socio-enviro/ecological-pollitically-culturally.
Personally, I'm all for the development of the northern regions of Australia, but I simply don't see it happening any time soon, not least of the reasons being socio-enviro/ecological-pollitically-culturally.
The limiting factors for population growth in Australia are probably these.
Much is made of the great waves of European migration to the United States in the 1800s. But in that era, the foreign born population of the US peaked in the 13-15% range. https://www.census.gov/library/worki...l%20population.
Right now in Australia the foreign born population is almost 30% of the total. It explains why Australia has been growing much faster than the US since the 1850s. It certainly is a growth trajectory. Australia's foreign born population has only been below 15% during the inter war years (WW1-WW2) and into the first few years after WW2.
The greatest limiting factor for agriculture in NT is probably economics; all large markets are a long distane away both domestic and foreign. People do market garden vegetables in the NT even in Alice Springs, but only for the local market. There's also fishing; the Gulf of Carpentaria is large fishery for prawns.
Last edited by Bakery Hill; 05-19-2023 at 01:52 AM..
That's why in my view, Queensland is the most Australian state. It's got the Gold Coast beaches, the Great Barrier Reef, tropical rainforests, the outback, a bit of desert, and yet it still actually gets occasional snow.
Despite having said this. I now think New South Wales is a better candidate. It has the Sydney Opera House and Harbour Bridge, which are the two things that are most associated with Australia, and like Queensland, it has a wide range of different climates and landscapes.
Despite having said this. I now think New South Wales is a better candidate. It has the Sydney Opera House and Harbour Bridge, which are the two things that are most associated with Australia, and like Queensland, it has a wide range of different climates and landscapes.
But surely those are icons and while well known internationally, would equate to the same question being asked about The UK, as being Big Ben or Tower of London?
Sydney is increasingly becoming in the Australian context akin to London. Too expensive to live for most but the most known.
I still think most average Australian suburbs, regardless of city, are much of a muchness, and the quintessential example of Australian life regardless of state.
As for the imagination of the most quintessential state held in the minds of many, especially overseas, with some thought on the subject, I would probably consider it a toss between QLD, WA, NT with parts of SA thrown in. Surely it must be wide open spaces, long road trips, heat and dust, endless skies, and so on.
What do you guys think the population of Australia will be by 2050? More importantly what's the reward for the person who is the closest?
Probably a more highly prized position at the camping ground?.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
