It been forecast by 2050 we will not be able to produce sufficient cereal and grain to feed to livestock to maintain the current levels of meat protein in our diet and will have to seek protein from elsewhere.
Certainly the lives of those on diets high in meat protein is going to have to change one that is primarily plant-based. And as you say, rising sea levels are going to be highly problematic, creating many millions of refugees that are going to have to be accommodated on higher ground, leading to further pressure on farmland. But it's important to recognise that the issue is primarily not of resource availability so much as resource distribution, those of us in the 'advanced' societies are consuming a massively disproportionate share of the world's resources.
https://cdn.friendsoftheearth.uk/sites/default/files/downloads/overconsumption.pdfhttps://populationmatters.org/the-facts/resources-consumptionDon't disagree, the cultural shock for advanced societies is going to be far greater than people realise.....history is littered with and has many examples of the problems and unrest created by taking 'something' away from someone who has a sense of entitlement and privilege to that resource, made worse if its something as basic as food and energy sources. Mass migration will be on an unprecedented scale, and increasing focus will go on food and energy security. Thank goodness in my hopefully long lifetime I can say I left the planet in a cleaner less polluted state than the one I came into. but zero net carbon highly unlikely.Global warming is seen as a post industrialisation phenomenon, however it goes back a few centuries earlier when higher carbon levels were produced as we intensified farming and opened up eg common land.
Coming back to the topic in hand, it puts our discussions around what fuels/energy will replaced fossil fuels into context.......any low carbon synthetic fuel with still enable us to indulge our passions without having to completely rebuild all of our infrastructure at enormous cost and use of resources for really little benefit, as the conversion process will generate considerable amounts new pollution within the manufacturing process for limited gains in the short term. To illustrate, I seem to remember a case study from my school days now well over 50/60 years old now, that suggested the total energy consumed in the building of a coal power station (transportation, steel and concrete production, building construction etc.) required the first 2O years energy generation of the power station to payback the total energy consumed in its construction...............that's why it is preferable to use current technology made cleaner and more efficient.
regards
