essay about life in 2050

24/7 writing help on your phone

To install StudyMoose App tap and then “Add to Home Screen”

What life will be in 2050?

Save to my list

Remove from my list

Example 2. E ssay about life in 2050

What life will be in 2050?. (2016, May 31). Retrieved from https://studymoose.com/what-life-will-be-in-2050-essay

"What life will be in 2050?." StudyMoose , 31 May 2016, https://studymoose.com/what-life-will-be-in-2050-essay

StudyMoose. (2016). What life will be in 2050? . [Online]. Available at: https://studymoose.com/what-life-will-be-in-2050-essay [Accessed: 6 Sep. 2024]

"What life will be in 2050?." StudyMoose, May 31, 2016. Accessed September 6, 2024. https://studymoose.com/what-life-will-be-in-2050-essay

"What life will be in 2050?," StudyMoose , 31-May-2016. [Online]. Available: https://studymoose.com/what-life-will-be-in-2050-essay. [Accessed: 6-Sep-2024]

StudyMoose. (2016). What life will be in 2050? . [Online]. Available at: https://studymoose.com/what-life-will-be-in-2050-essay [Accessed: 6-Sep-2024]

• IntroductionLooking towards the future 2050 According to Pages: 3 (617 words)
• City Life Vs Country Life Pages: 6 (1613 words)
• Country Life Is Better Than City Life Pages: 7 (1984 words)
• A Life Lesson in Keller’s The Story of My Life: Empowering Self-Efficacy Pages: 6 (1531 words)
• Debating the Relationship Between Art and Life: Does Art Imitate Life? Pages: 5 (1426 words)
• My Life Experience How It Changed My Life Pages: 6 (1611 words)
• Brecht’s Life of Galileo as an Examination of Key Life Events of a Great Physicist Pages: 7 (1823 words)
• Single Life vs. Married Life: Lifestyle Analysis Pages: 3 (609 words)
• How The University Life in NSU Changed My Life? Pages: 2 (466 words)
• Education Is Not a Preparation for Life; Education Is Life Itself Pages: 2 (504 words)

👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!

Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.

• The Big Think Interview
• Your Brain on Money
• Explore the Library
• The Universe. A History.
• The Progress Issue
• A Brief History Of Quantum Mechanics
• 6 Flaws In Our Understanding Of The Universe
• Michio Kaku
• Neil deGrasse Tyson
• Michelle Thaller
• Steven Pinker
• Ray Kurzweil
• Cornel West
• Helen Fisher
• Smart Skills
• High Culture
• The Present
• Hard Science
• Special Issues
• Starts With A Bang
• Everyday Philosophy
• The Learning Curve
• The Long Game
• Perception Box
• Strange Maps
• Free Newsletters
• Memberships

What Will Life Be Like in 2050?

By mid-century there will likely be 9 billion people on the planet, consuming ever more resources and leading ever more technologically complex lives. What will our cities be like? How much will artificial intelligence advance? Will global warming trigger catastrophic changes, or will we be able to engineer our way out of the climate change crisis?

Making predictions is, by nature, a dicey business, but to celebrate the 40th anniversary of Smithsonian magazine Big Think asked top minds from a variety of fields to weigh in on what the future holds 40 years from now. The result is our latest special series, Life in 2050 . Demographic changes in world population and population growth will certainly be dramatic. Rockefeller University mathematical biologist Joel Cohen says it’s likely that by 2050 the majority of the people in the world will live in urban areas, and will have a significantly higher average age than people today . Cities theorist Richard Florida thinks urbanization trends will reinvent the education system  of the United States, making our economy less real estate driven and erasing the divisions between home and work.

Large migrations from developing countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Mexico, and countries in the Middle East could disrupt western governments and harm the unity of France, Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, Poland, and the  United Kingdom  under the umbrella of the  European Union .

And rapidly advancing technology will continue ever more rapidly. According to Bill Mitchell, the late director of MIT’s Smart Cities research group, cities of the future won’t look like “some sort of science-fiction fantasy” or “Star Trek” but it’s likely that “discreet, unobtrusive” technological advances and information overlays, i.e. virtual reality and augmented reality, will change how we live in significant ways. Self-driving cars will make the roads safer, driving more efficient, and provide faster transports. A larger version of driverless cars—driverless trucks—may make long haul drivers obsolete.

Charles Ebinger, Director of the Energy Security Initiative at the Brookings Institution also thinks that by 2050 we will also have a so-called “smart grid” where all of our appliances are linked directly to energy distribution systems , allowing for real-time pricing based on supply and demand. Such a technology would greatly benefit energy hungry nations like  China  and India, while potentially harming fossil fuel energy producers like Canada and .

Meanwhile, the Internet will continue to radically transform media , destroying the traditional model of what a news organization is, says author and former New York Times Public Editor Daniel Okrent, who believes the most common kinds of news organizations in the future will be “individuals and small alliances of individuals” reporting and publishing on niche topics. 

But what will all this new technology mean? Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, the director of the Information & Innovation Policy Research Center at the National University of Singapore, hopes that advances in technology will make us more empowered, motivated and active , rather than mindless consumers of information and entertainment. And NYU interactive telecommunications professor Clay Shirky worries that technological threats could endanger much of the openness that we now enjoy online , perhaps turning otherwise free-information countries into mirrors of closed states like China and Turkey.

Some long view predictions are downright dire. Environmentalist Bill McKibben says that if we don’t make major strides in combating global warming, it’s likely we could see out-of-control rises in sea levels — particularly dangerous in island nations like the Philippines — enormous crop shortfalls, and wars over increasingly scarce freshwater resource s. But information technology may yield some optimism for our planet, says oceanographer Sylvia Earle, who thinks that services like Google Earth have the potential to turn everyday people into ocean conservationists .

In the financial world, things will be very different indeed, according to MIT professor Simon Johnson, who thinks many of the financial products being sold today, like over-the-counter derivatives, will be illegal —judged, accurately, by regulators to not be in the best interests of consumers and failing to meet their basic needs. If economic growth rates remain steady, however, it may present a challenge to regulators.

We will live longer and remain healthier. Patricia Bloom, an associate professor in the geriatrics department of Mt. Sinai Hospital, says we may not routinely live to be 120, but it’s possible that we will be able to extend wellness and shorten decline and disability for people as they age . AIDS research pioneer David Ho says the HIV/AIDS epidemic will still be with us , but we will know a lot more about the virus than we do today—and therapies will be much more effective. Meanwhile, Jay Parkinson, the co-founder of Hello Health, says the health care industry has a “huge opportunity” to change the way it communicates with patients by conceiving of individual health in relation to happiness.

In terms of how we will eat, green markets founder and “real food” proponent Nina Planck is optimistic that there will be more small slaughterhouses, more small creameries, and more regional food operations—and we’ll be healthier as a result . New York Times cooking columnist Mark Bittman, similarly, thinks that people will eat fewer processed foods , and eat foods grown closer to where they live. And Anson Mills farmer Glenn Roberts thinks that more people will clue into the “ethical responsibility” to grow and preserve land-raised farm systems . And what will our culture be like? We may not get rid of racism in America entirely in the next 40 years, but NAACP President Benjamin Jealous predicts that in the coming decades the issue of race will become “much less significant,” even as the issue of class may rise in importance. Father James Martin, a Jesuit priest, says it’s even likely that we’ll see a black pope , reversing centuries of Euro-centrism in favor of Catholics in  Africa. Nigeria is one such country with a large Catholic population. Meanwhile, prisons expert Robert Perkinson says he thinks there will be fewer Americans in prison in 2050 , because we will realize that the current high levels of incarceration are out of sync with our history and values. Historian and social scientist Joan Wallach Scott worries, however, that unless the countries of Europe figure out how to accommodate Muslim immigrant populations, t here will be more riots, and increasing divisions along economic, religious and ethnic lines , such instability could have knock on effects in countries ranging from Egypt and Iran to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. —

We want to hear from you! Let us know what you think about our website.

interstitialRedirectModalTitle

interstitialRedirectModalMessage

• Show search

Magazine Articles

A More Sustainable Path to 2050

Science shows us a clear path to 2050 in which both nature and 10 billion people can thrive together.

August 30, 2019

Written for The Nature Conservancy Magazine Fall 2019 issue by Heather Tallis, former lead scientist for TNC.

A few years ago The Nature Conservancy began a process of reassessing its vision and goals for prioritizing its work around the globe. The resulting statement called for a world where “nature and people thrive, and people act to conserve nature for its own sake and its ability to fulfill and enrich our lives.”

That sounds like a sweet future, but if you’re a scientist, like I am, you immediately start to wonder what that statement means in a practical sense. Could we actually get there? Is it even possible for people and nature to thrive together?

Our leaders had the same question. In fact, when the vision statement was first presented at a board meeting, our president leaned over and asked me if we had the science to support it.

“No,” I said. “But we can try to figure it out.”

There is a way to sustain nature and 10 billion people.

Explore the path to a better world. Just 3 changes yield an entirely different future.

Ultimately, I assembled a collaborative team of researchers to take a hard look at whether it really is possible to do better for both people and nature: Can we have a future where people get the food, energy and economic growth they need without sacrificing more nature?

Modeling the Status Quo: What the World Will Look Like in 2050

Working with peers at the University of Minnesota and 11 other universities, think tanks and nonprofits, we started by looking into what experts predict the world will look like in 2050 in terms of population growth and economic expansion. The most credible projections estimate that human population will increase from about 7 billion people today to 9.7 billion by 2050, and the global economy will be three times as large as it is today.

Our next step was to create a set of mathematical models analyzing how that growth will influence demand for food, energy and water.

We first asked how nature will be doing in 2050 if we just keep doing things the way we’ve been doing them. To answer this, we assumed that expanding croplands and pastures would be carved out of natural lands, the way they are today. And we didn’t put any new restrictions on the burning of fossil fuels. We called this the “business as usual” scenario. It’s the path we’re on today. On this current path, most of the world’s energy—about 76%—will come from burning fossil fuels. This will push the Earth’s average temperature up by about 5.8 degrees Fahrenheit, driving more severe weather, droughts, fires and other destructive patterns. That dirty energy also will expose half of the global population to dangerous levels of air pollution.

Dig into the Research

Explore the models behind the two paths to 2050 and download the published findings.

We first asked how nature will be doing in 2050 if we just keep doing things the way we’ve been doing them.

Meanwhile, the total amount of cropland will increase by about the size of the state of Colorado. Farms will also suffer from increasing water stress—meaning, simply, there won’t be enough water to easily supply agricultural needs and meet the water requirements of nearby cities, towns and wildlife.

In this business-as-usual scenario, fishing worldwide is left to its own devices and there are no additional measures in place to protect nature beyond what we have today. As a result, annual fish catches decline by 11% as fisheries are pushed to the brink by unsustainable practices. On land, we end up losing 257 million more hectares (about 10 Colorados) of our native forests and grasslands. Freshwater systems suffer, too, as droughts and water consumption, especially for agriculture, increase.

Overall, the 2050 predicted by this business-as-usual model is a world of scarcity, where neither nature nor people are thriving. The future is pretty grim under this scenario—it’s certainly not a world that any of us would want to live in.

We wanted to know, “does it really have to be this way?”

Modeling a More Sustainable 2050

Next, we used our model to test whether predicted growth by 2050 really requires such an outcome. In this version of the future, we allowed the global economy and the population to grow in exactly the same manner, but we adjusted variables to include more sustainability measures.

The 2050 predicted by the business-as-usual model is a world of scarcity, where neither nature nor people are thriving. The future is pretty grim under this scenario—it’s certainly not a world that any of us would want to live in.

We didn’t go crazy with the sustainability scenario. We didn’t assume that everyone was going to become a vegan or start driving hydrogen cell cars tomorrow. Instead, the model allowed people to continue doing the basic things we’re doing today, but to do them a little differently and to adopt some green technologies that already exist a little bit faster.

In this sustainable future, we limited global warming to 2.9 degrees Fahrenheit, which would force societies to reduce fossil fuel consumption to just 13% of total energy production. That means quickly adopting clean energy, which will increase the amount of land needed for wind, solar and other renewable energy development. But many of the new wind and solar plants can be built on land that has already been developed or degraded, such as rooftops and abandoned farm fields. This will help reduce the pressure to develop new energy sources in natural areas.

We also plotted out some changes in how food is produced. We assumed each country would still grow the same basic suite of crops, but to conserve water, fertilizer and land, we assumed that those crops would be planted in the growing regions where they are most suited. For example, in the United States we wouldn’t grow as much cotton in Arizona’s deserts or plant thirsty alfalfa in the driest parts of California’s San Joaquin Valley. We also assumed that successful fishery policies in use in some places today could be implemented all over the world.

Under this sustainability scenario, we required that countries meet the target of protecting 17% of each ecoregion, as set by the Convention on Biological Diversity. Only about half that much is likely to be protected under the business-as-usual scenario, so this is a direct win for nature.

What 2050 Could Look Like

The difference in this path to 2050 was striking. The number of additional people who will be exposed to dangerous levels of air pollution declines to just 7% of the planet’s population, or 656 million, compared with half the global population, or 4.85 billion people, in our business-as-usual scenario. Air pollution is already one of the top killers globally, so reducing this health risk is a big deal. Limiting climate change also reduces water scarcity and the frequency of destructive storms and wildfires, while staving off the projected widespread loss of plant and animal species (including my son’s favorite animal, the pika, that’s already losing its mountain habitat because of climate change).

In the sustainability scenario we still produce enough food for humanity, but we need less land and water to do it. So the total amount of land under agricultural production actually decreases by seven times the area of Colorado, and the number of cropland acres located in water-stressed basins declines by 30% compared with business as usual. Finally, we see a 26% increase in fish landings compared to 2010, once all fisheries are properly managed.

Although the land needed for wind and solar installations does grow substantially, we still keep over half of nearly all the world’s habitat types intact, and despite growth in cities, food production and energy needs, we end up with much more of the Earth’s surface left for nature than we would under the business-as-usual scenario.

Our modeling research let us answer our question. Yes, a world where people and nature thrive is entirely possible. But it’s not inevitable. Reaching this sustainable future will take hard work—and we need to get started immediately.

3 Sustainable Changes To Make Now

That’s where organizations like TNC come in. The Conservancy is working on strategies with governments and businesses to adopt sustainable measures, providing near- and long-term benefits to society as a whole. Our research shows there’s at least one path to a more sustainable world in 2050, and that major advances can be made if all parts of society focus their efforts on three changes.

First, we need to ramp up clean energy and site it on lands that have already been developed or degraded. In the Mojave Desert, for instance, TNC has identified some 1.4 million acres of former ranchlands, mines and other degraded areas that would be ideal for solar development. We need to do much more to remove the policy and economic barriers that still make a transition to clean energy hard. Technology is no longer the major limiting factor. We are.

The most critical action each of us can take is to support global leaders who have a plan for stopping climate change in our lifetimes.

Second, we need to grow more food using less land and water. One way to do that is by raising crops in places that are best suited for them. The Conservancy has been piloting this, too. In Arizona, TNC partnered with local farmers in the Verde River Valley to help them switch from growing thirsty crops like alfalfa and corn in the heat of the summer to growing malt barley, which can be harvested earlier in the season with less draw on precious water supplies. This is not a revolutionary change—the same farmers are still growing crops on the same land—but it can have a revolutionary impact.

Finally, we need to end overfishing. The policy tools to do so have been available for many years. What we must do now is get creative about how we get those policies adopted and enforced. One example I have been impressed by is our work in Mexico, where TNC is involved in looking at the root causes of what’s limiting good fishing behavior. The answer is unexpected: social security debt that many fishers have accrued by being off the books for many years. The Conservancy is exploring an ambitious partnership and a novel financial mechanism that could forgive this debt and persuade more fishers to report their catch and adopt sustainability measures.

The Most Important Change Now: Clean Energy

These are just a few examples from North America. There are many more from around the world. To achieve a more sustainable future, governments, industry and civic institutions everywhere will have to make substantial changes—and the most important one right now is to make a big investment in clean energy over the next 10 years. That’s a short timeline, but not an impossible one. I don’t like what I’m seeing yet, but I’m hopeful. It took the United States just a decade to reach the moon, once the country put its mind to the goal. And solar energy is already cheaper (nearly half the price per megawatt) than coal, and outpacing it for new capacity creation—something no one predicted would happen this fast.

We need to do much more to remove the policy and economic barriers that still make a transition to clean energy hard. Technology is no longer the major limiting factor. We are.

How will we get there? By far the most critical action each of us can take is to support global leaders who have a plan for stopping climate change in our lifetimes. Climate may not feel like the most pressing issue at times—what with the economy, health care, education and other issues taking up headlines. But the science is clear: We’ve got 10 years to get our emissions under control. That’s it.

We’ve already begun to see the impacts of climate change as more communities face a big uptick in the severity and frequency of droughts, floods, wildfires, hurricanes and other disasters. Much worse is on the way if we don’t make the needed changes. It’s been easy for most of us to sit back and expect that climate change will only affect someone else, far away. But that’s what the people in Arkansas, California, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Washington, the Dominican Republic, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Mexico, the United Kingdom, the Philippines, India and Mozambique thought. Every one of these places—and many more—have seen one of the worst disasters on its historic record in the past 10 years.

There are so many paths we could take to 2050. Clearly, some are better than others. We get to choose. Which one do you want to take?

Stand up for a More Sustainable Future

Join The Nature Conservancy as we call on leaders to support science-backed solutions.

Getting to Sustainability

Carbon Capture

The most powerful carbon capture technology is cheap, readily available and growing all around us: Trees and plants.

Energy Sprawl Solutions

We can ramp up clean energy worldwide and site it wisely to limit the effect on wildlife.

Fishing for Better Data

Electronic monitoring can make fisheries more sustainable.

What Will Your Life Be Like in 2050?

Will it be just like today, but electric? Or will it be very different?

• University of Toronto

• Harvard University Extension School

Hulton Archives/ Getty Images

• Environment
• Business & Policy
• Home & Design
• Current Events
• Treehugger Voices
• News Archive

New Scientist magazine's chief reporter Adam Vaughan recently published "Net-zero living: how your day will look in a carbon-neutral world ." Here, he imagines what a typical day would be like in the future—through the lens of Isla, "a child today, in 2050"—after we've cut carbon emissions. Vaughan says “most of us are lacking a visualization of what life will be like at net zero” and acknowledges the writing is fiction: "By its nature, it is speculative – but it is informed by research, expert opinion, and trials happening right now.”

Isla lives in the south of the United Kingdom—will it still be a united kingdom in 2050?—and her life looks pretty much like life does today: She has a house, a car, a job, and a cup of tea in the morning. There are wind turbines, great forests, and giant machines sucking carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. It all sounds like a green and pleasant land, but it didn’t sound like the future to me.

It’s an interesting exercise, imagining what it will be like in 30 years. I thought I would give it a try: Here is some speculative fiction about Edie, living in Toronto, Canada in 2050.

Edie’s alarm goes off at 4:00 a.m. She gets up, folds up the bed in the converted garage in an old house in Toronto that is her apartment and workshop, and makes herself a cup of caffeine-infused chicory; only the very rich can afford real coffee 1 .

She considers herself to be very lucky to have this garage in what was her grandparents’ house. The only people who live in houses these days either inherited them or are multi-millionaires from all over the world, but especially from Arizona and other Southern states 2 , desperate to move Canada with its cooler climate and plentiful water and can afford the million-dollar immigrant visa fee.

She hurries to prepare her pushcart, actually a big electric cargo bike, filling it with the tomatoes, and preserves and pickles she prepared with fruits and vegetables she bought from backyard gardeners. Edie then rides it downtown where all the big office buildings have been converted into tiny apartments for climate refugees. The streets downtown look very much like Delancey Street in New York looked like in 1905, with e-pushcarts lining the roads where cars used to park.

Edie is lucky to be working. There are no office or industrial jobs anymore: Artificial Intelligence and robots took care of that 3 . The few jobs left are in service, culture, craft, health care, or real estate. In fact, selling real estate has become the nation’s biggest industry; there is a lot of it, and Sudbury is the new Miami.

Fortunately for Edie, there is a big demand for homemade foods from trustworthy sources. All the food in the grocery stores is grown in test tubes or made in factories. Edie sells out and rides home in time for siesta. There may be lots of electricity from wind and solar farms, but even running tiny heat pumps 4 for cooling is really expensive at peak times. The streets are unpleasantly hot, so many people sleep through the midday.

She checks the balance in her Personal Carbon Allowance (PCA) account to see if she has enough to buy another imported battery for her pushcart e-bike 5 after her nap; batteries have a lot of embodied carbon and transportation emissions and might eat up a month’s worth of her PCA. If she doesn’t have enough then she will have to buy carbon credits, and they are expensive. She sets her alarm for 6:00 p.m. when the streets of Toronto will come alive again on this hot November day.

The New Scientist article is illustrated with an image showing people walking and biking, turbines spinning, electric trains running, with kayaks, not cars. This is not an uncommon vision: There are many who suggest we just have to electrify everything and cover it all with solar panels and then we can keep on with the happy motoring.

I am not so optimistic. If we don't keep the global rise in temperature to under 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 degrees Celsius) then things are going to get messy. So this story was not just a speculative fantasy but based on previous writing about the need for sufficiency and worries about the embodied carbon of making everything , with some notes from previous Treehugger posts:

• Thanks to climate change, "Coffee plantations in South America, Africa, Asia, and Hawaii are all being threatened by rising air temperatures and erratic rainfall patterns, which invite disease and invasive species to infest the coffee plant and ripening beans." More in Treehugger.
• "Dwindling water supplies and below-average rainfall have consequences for those living in the West." More in Treehugger.
• "We're witnessing the Third Industrial Revolution Playing out in real time." More in Treehugger.
• Tiny heat pumps for tiny spaces are probably going to be common. More in Treehugger.
• Electric cargo bikes will be a powerful tool for low-carbon commerce. More in Treehugger.
• What Will Our Gardens Look Like in 2050?
• Can the Concrete Industry Really Go Carbon Neutral by 2050?
• 2030 Is Out. How About 2050 – Is 2050 Good For You?
• 'The Future We Choose: Surviving the Climate Crisis' (Book Review)
• 2021 in Review: The Year in Net-Zero
• Carbon Emissions Will Kill People. Be Careful Whom You Blame.
• Net-Zero Efforts of Canadian Oil Sands Companies Are Greenwashing
• The International Energy Agency Aims for Net-Zero by 2024
• Architecture 2030 Goes After Embodied Carbon and This Is a Very Big Deal
• John Kerry Says Half of Carbon Cuts Will Come from Tech That We Don't Have
• Emissions from Diet Could Eat Up the Entire 1.5 Degree Carbon Budget
• IPCC Report Is a Prescription for Fixing the Climate Crisis—'It's Now or Never'
• A Year of Living the 1.5 Degree Lifestyle, Extreme Edition
• What Does '12 Years to Save the Planet' Really Mean?
• Generational Divide Over Climate Action Isn't Real, Study Finds
• You Can Live a 1.5 Degree Lifestyle, New Pilot Study Shows

• climate change

Hello From the Year 2050. We Avoided the Worst of Climate Change — But Everything Is Different

L et’s imagine for a moment that we’ve reached the middle of the century. It’s 2050, and we have a moment to reflect—the climate fight remains the consuming battle of our age, but its most intense phase may be in our rearview mirror. And so we can look back to see how we might have managed to dramatically change our society and economy. We had no other choice.

There was a point after 2020 when we began to collectively realize a few basic things.

One, we weren’t getting out of this unscathed. Climate change, even in its early stages, had begun to hurt: watching a California city literally called Paradise turn into hell inside of two hours made it clear that all Americans were at risk. When you breathe wildfire smoke half the summer in your Silicon Valley fortress, or struggle to find insurance for your Florida beach house, doubt creeps in even for those who imagined they were immune.

Two, there were actually some solutions. By 2020, renewable energy was the cheapest way to generate electricity around the planet—in fact, the cheapest way there ever had been. The engineers had done their job, taking sun and wind from quirky backyard DIY projects to cutting-edge technology. Batteries had plummeted down the same cost curve as renewable energy, so the fact that the sun went down at night no longer mattered quite so much—you could store its rays to use later.

And the third realization? People began to understand that the biggest reason we weren’t making full, fast use of these new technologies was the political power of the fossil-fuel industry. Investigative journalists had exposed its three-decade campaign of denial and disinformation, and attorneys general and plaintiffs’ lawyers were beginning to pick them apart. And just in time.

These trends first intersected powerfully on Election Day in 2020. The Halloween hurricane that crashed into the Gulf didn’t just take hundreds of lives and thousands of homes; it revealed a political seam that had begun to show up in polling data a year or two before. Of all the issues that made suburban Americans—women especially—­uneasy about President Trump, his stance on climate change was near the top. What had seemed a modest lead for the Democratic challenger widened during the last week of the campaign as damage reports from Louisiana and Mississippi rolled in; on election night it turned into a rout, and the analysts insisted that an under­appreciated “green vote” had played a vital part—after all, actual green parties in Canada, the U.K. and much of continental Europe were also outperforming expectations. Young voters were turning out in record numbers: the Greta Generation, as punsters were calling them, made climate change their No. 1 issue.

And when the new President took the oath of office, she didn’t disappoint. In her Inaugural Address, she pledged to immediately put America back in the Paris Agreement—but then she added, “We know by now that Paris is nowhere near enough. Even if all the countries followed all the promises made in that accord, the temperature would still rise more than 3°C (5°F or 6°F). If we let the planet warm that much, we won’t be able to have civilizations like the ones we’re used to. So we’re going to make the changes we need to make, and we’re going to make them fast.”

Fast, of course, is a word that doesn’t really apply to Capitol Hill or most of the world’s other Congresses, Parliaments and Central Committees. It took constant demonstrations from ever larger groups like Extinction Rebellion, and led by young activists especially from the communities suffering the most, to ensure that politicians feared an angry electorate more than an angry carbon lobby. But America, which historically had poured more carbon into the atmosphere than any other nation, did cease blocking progress. With the filibuster removed, the Senate passed—by the narrowest of margins—one bill after another to end subsidies for coal and gas and oil companies, began to tax the carbon they produced, and acted on the basic principles of the Green New Deal: funding the rapid deployment of solar panels and wind turbines, guaranteeing federal jobs for anyone who wanted that work, and putting an end to drilling and mining on federal lands.

Sign up for One.Five, TIME’s climate change newsletter

Since those public lands trailed only China, the U.S., India and Russia as a source of carbon, that was a big deal. Its biggest impact was on Wall Street, where investors began to treat fossil-fuel stocks with increasing disdain. When BlackRock, the biggest money manager in the world, cleaned its basic passive index fund of coal, oil and gas stocks, the companies were essentially rendered off-limits to normal investors. As protesters began cutting up their Chase bank cards, the biggest lender to the fossil-fuel industry suddenly decided green investments made more sense. Even the staid insurance industry began refusing to underwrite new oil and gas pipelines—and shorn of its easy access to capital, the industry was also shorn of much of its political influence. Every quarter meant fewer voters who mined coal and more who installed solar panels, and that made political change even easier.

As America’s new leaders began trying to mend fences with other nations, climate action proved to be a crucial way to rebuild diplomatic trust. China and India had their own reasons for wanting swift action—mostly, the fact that smog-choked cities and ever deadlier heat waves were undermining the stability of the ruling regimes. When Beijing announced that its Belt and Road Initiative would run on renewable energy, not coal, the energy future of much of Asia changed overnight. When India started mandating electric cars and scooters for urban areas, the future of the internal-combustion engine was largely sealed. Teslas continued to attract upscale Americans, but the real numbers came from lower-priced electric cars pouring out of Asian factories. That was enough to finally convince even Detroit that a seismic shift was under way: when the first generation of Ford E-150 pickups debuted, with ads demonstrating their unmatched torque by showing them towing a million-pound locomotive, only the most unreconstructed motorheads were still insisting on the superiority of gas-powered rides.

Other easy technological gains came in our homes. After a century of keeping a tank of oil or gas in the basement for heating, people quickly discovered the appeal of air-source heat pumps, which turned the heat of the outdoors (even on those rare days when the temperature still dropped below zero) into comfortable indoor air. Gas burners gave way to induction cooktops. The last incandescent bulbs were in museums, and even most of the compact fluorescents had been long since replaced by LEDs. Electricity demand was up—but when people plugged in their electric vehicles at night, the ever growing fleet increasingly acted like a vast battery, smoothing out the curves as the wind dropped or the sun clouded. Some people stopped eating meat, and lots and lots of people ate less of it—a cultural transformation made easier by the fact that Impossible Burgers turned out to be at least as juicy as the pucks that fast-food chains had been slinging for years. The number of cows on the world’s farms started to drop, and with them the source of perhaps a fifth of emissions. More crucially, new diets reduced the pressure to cut down the remaining tropical rain forests to make way for grazing land.

In other words, the low-hanging fruit was quickly plucked, and the pluckers were well paid. Perhaps the fastest-growing business on the planet involved third-party firms that would retrofit a factory or an office with energy-efficient technology and simply take a cut of the savings on the monthly electric bill. Small businesses, and rural communities, began to notice the economic advantages of keeping the money paid for power relatively close to home instead of shipping it off to Houston or Riyadh. The world had wasted so much energy that much of the early work was easy, like losing weight by getting your hair cut.

But the early euphoria came to an end pretty quickly. By the end of the 2020s, it became clear we would have to pay the price of delaying action for decades.

For one thing, the cuts in emissions that scientists prescribed were almost impossibly deep. “If you’d started in 1990 when we first warned you, the job was manageable: you could have cut carbon a percent or two a year,” one eminent physicist explained. “But waiting 30 years turned a bunny slope into a black diamond.” As usual, the easy “solutions” turned out to be no help at all: fracked natural-gas wells were leaking vast quantities of methane into the atmosphere, and “biomass burning”—­cutting down forests to burn them for electricity—was putting a pulse of carbon into the air at precisely the wrong moment. (As it happened, the math showed letting trees stand was crucial for pulling carbon from the atmosphere—when secondary forests were allowed to grow, they sucked up a third or more of the excess carbon humanity was producing.) Environmentalists learned they needed to make some compromises, and so most of America’s aging nuclear reactors were left online past their decommissioning dates: that lower-carbon power supplemented the surging renewable industry in the early years, even as researchers continued work to see if fusion power, thorium reactors or some other advanced design could work.

The real problem, though, was that climate change itself kept accelerating, even as the world began trying to turn its energy and agriculture systems around. The giant slug of carbon that the world had put into the atmosphere—more since 1990 than in all of human history before—acted like a time-delayed fuse, and the temperature just kept rising. Worse, it appeared that scientists had systematically underestimated just how much damage each tenth of a degree would actually do, a point underscored in 2032 when a behemoth slice of the West Antarctic ice sheet slid majestically into the southern ocean, and all of a sudden the rise in sea level was being measured in feet, not inches. (Nothing, it turned out, could move Americans to embrace the metric system.) And the heating kept triggering feedback loops that in turn accelerated the heating: ever larger wildfires, for instance, kept pushing ever more carbon into the air, and their smoke blackened ice sheets that in turn melted even faster.

This hotter world produced an ongoing spate of emergencies: “forest-fire season” was now essentially year-round, and the warmer ocean kept hurricanes and typhoons boiling months past the old norms. And sometimes the damage was novel: ancient carcasses kept emerging from the melting permafrost of the north, and with them germs from illnesses long thought extinct. But the greatest crises were the slower, more inexorable ones: the ongoing drought and desertification was forcing huge numbers of Africans, Asians and Central Americans to move; in many places, the heat waves had literally become unbearable, with nighttime temperatures staying above 100°F and outdoor work all but impossible for weeks and months at a time. On low-lying ground like the Mekong Delta, the rising ocean salted fields essential to supplying the world with rice. The U.N. had long ago estimated the century could see a billion climate refugees, and it was beginning to appear it was unnervingly correct. What could the rich countries say? These were people who hadn’t caused the crisis now devouring their lives, and there weren’t enough walls and cages to keep them at bay, so the migrations kept roiling the politics of the planet.

There were, in fact, two possible ways forward. The most obvious path was a constant competition between nations and individuals to see who could thrive in this new climate regime, with luckier places turning themselves into fortresses above the flood. Indeed some people in some places tried to cling to old notions: plug in some solar panels and they could somehow return to a more naive world, where economic expansion was still the goal of every government.

But there was a second response that carried the day in most countries, as growing numbers of people came to understand that the ground beneath our feet had truly shifted. If the economy was the lens through which we’d viewed the world for a century, now survival was the only sensible basis on which to make decisions. Those decisions targeted not just carbon dioxide; these societies went after the wild inequality that also marked the age. The Green New Deal turned out to be everything the Koch brothers had most feared when it was introduced: a tool to make America a fairer, healthier, better-educated place. It was emulated around the world, just as America’s Clean Air Act had long served as a template for laws across the globe. Slowly both the Keeling Curve, measuring carbon in the atmosphere, and the Gini coefficient, measuring the distribution of wealth, began to flatten.

That’s where we are today. We clearly did not “escape” climate change or “solve” global warming—the temperature keeps climbing, though the rate of increase has lessened. It’s turned into a wretched century, which is considerably better than a catastrophic one. We ended up with the most profound and most dangerous physical changes in human history. Our civilization surely teetered—and an enormous number of people paid an unfair and overwhelming price—but it did not fall.

People have learned to defend what can be practically defended: expensive seawalls and pumps mean New York is still New York, though the Antarctic may yet have something to say on the subject. Other places we’ve learned to let go: much of the East Coast has moved in a few miles, to more defensible ground. Yes, that took trillions of dollars in real estate off the board—but the roads and the bridges would have cost trillions to defend, and even then the odds were bad.

Cities look different now—much more densely populated, as NIMBY defenses against new development gave way to an increasingly vibrant urbanism. Smart municipalities banned private cars from the center of town, opening up free public-transit systems and building civic fleets of self-driving cars that got rid of the space wasted on parking spots. But rural districts have changed too: the erratic weather put a premium on hands-on agricultural skills, which in turn provided opportunities for migrants arriving from ruined farmlands elsewhere. (Farming around solar panels has become a particular specialty.) America’s rail network is not quite as good as it was in the early 20th century, but it gets closer each year, which is good news since low-carbon air travel proved hard to get off the ground.

What’s changed most of all is the mood. The defiant notion that we would forever overcome nature has given way to pride of a different kind: increasingly we celebrate our ability to bend without breaking, to adapt as gracefully as possible to a natural world whose temper we’ve come to respect. When we look back to the start of the century we are, of course, angry that people did so little to slow the great heating: if we’d acknowledged climate change in earnest a decade or two earlier, we might have shaved a degree off the temperature, and a degree is measured in great pain and peril. But we also know it was hard for people to grasp what was happening: human history stretched back 10,000 years, and those millennia were physically stable, so it made emotional sense to assume that stability would stretch forward as well as past.

We know much better now: we know that we’ve knocked the planet off its foundations, and that our job, for the foreseeable centuries, is to absorb the bounces as she rolls. We’re dancing as nimbly as we can, and so far we haven’t crashed.

This is one article in a series on the state of the planet’s response to climate change. Read the rest of the stories and sign up for One.Five, TIME’s climate change newsletter.

More Must-Reads from TIME

• The 100 Most Influential People in AI 2024
• Inside the Rise of Bitcoin-Powered Pools and Bathhouses
• How Nayib Bukele’s ‘Iron Fist’ Has Transformed El Salvador
• What Makes a Friendship Last Forever?
• Long COVID Looks Different in Kids
• Your Questions About Early Voting , Answered
• Column: Your Cynicism Isn’t Helping Anybody
• The 32 Most Anticipated Books of Fall 2024

Contact us at [email protected]

To revisit this article, visit My Profile, then View saved stories .

• The Big Story
• Newsletters
• Steven Levy's Plaintext Column
• WIRED Classics from the Archive
• WIRED Insider
• WIRED Consulting

Yuval Noah Harari on what the year 2050 has in store for humankind

Forget programming - the best skill to teach children is reinvention. In this exclusive extract from his new book, the author of Sapiens reveals what 2050 has in store for humankind.

Part one: Change is the only constant

Humankind is facing unprecedented revolutions, all our old stories are crumbling and no new story has so far emerged to replace them. How can we prepare ourselves and our children for a world of such unprecedented transformations and radical uncertainties? A baby born today will be thirty-something in 2050. If all goes well, that baby will still be around in 2100, and might even be an active citizen of the 22nd century. What should we teach that baby that will help him or her survive and flourish in the world of 2050 or of the 22nd century? What kind of skills will he or she need in order to get a job, understand what is happening around them and navigate the maze of life?

Unfortunately, since nobody knows how the world will look in 2050 – not to mention 2100 – we don’t know the answer to these questions. Of course, humans have never been able to predict the future with accuracy. But today it is more difficult than ever before, because once technology enables us to engineer bodies, brains and minds, we can no longer be certain about anything – including things that previously seemed fixed and eternal.

A thousand years ago, in 1018, there were many things people didn’t know about the future, but they were nevertheless convinced that the basic features of human society were not going to change. If you lived in China in 1018, you knew that by 1050 the Song Empire might collapse, the Khitans might invade from the north, and plagues might kill millions. However, it was clear to you that even in 1050 most people would still work as farmers and weavers, rulers would still rely on humans to staff their armies and bureaucracies, men would still dominate women, life expectancy would still be about 40, and the human body would be exactly the same. Hence in 1018, poor Chinese parents taught their children how to plant rice or weave silk, and wealthier parents taught their boys how to read the Confucian classics, write calligraphy or fight on horseback – and taught their girls to be modest and obedient housewives. It was obvious these skills would still be needed in 1050.

In contrast, today we have no idea how China or the rest of the world will look in 2050. We don’t know what people will do for a living, we don’t know how armies or bureaucracies will function, and we don’t know what gender relations will be like. Some people will probably live much longer than today, and the human body itself might undergo an unprecedented revolution thanks to bioengineering and direct brain-computer interfaces. Much of what kids learn today will likely be irrelevant by 2050.

At present, too many schools focus on cramming information. In the past this made sense, because information was scarce, and even the slow trickle of existing information was repeatedly blocked by censorship. If you lived, say, in a small provincial town in Mexico in 1800, it was difficult for you to know much about the wider world. There was no radio, television, daily newspapers or public libraries. Even if you were literate and had access to a private library, there was not much to read other than novels and religious tracts. The Spanish Empire heavily censored all texts printed locally, and allowed only a dribble of vetted publications to be imported from outside. Much the same was true if you lived in some provincial town in Russia, India, Turkey or China. When modern schools came along, teaching every child to read and write and imparting the basic facts of geography, history and biology, they represented an immense improvement.

In contrast, in the 21st century we are flooded by enormous amounts of information, and even the censors don’t try to block it. Instead, they are busy spreading misinformation or distracting us with irrelevancies. If you live in some provincial Mexican town and you have a smartphone, you can spend many lifetimes just reading Wikipedia, watching TED talks, and taking free online courses. No government can hope to conceal all the information it doesn’t like. On the other hand, it is alarmingly easy to inundate the public with conflicting reports and red herrings. People all over the world are but a click away from the latest accounts of the bombardment of Aleppo or of melting ice caps in the Arctic, but there are so many contradictory accounts that it is hard to know what to believe. Besides, countless other things are just a click away, making it difficult to focus, and when politics or science look too complicated it is tempting to switch to funny cat videos, celebrity gossip or porn.

In such a world, the last thing a teacher needs to give her pupils is more information. They already have far too much of it. Instead, people need the ability to make sense of information, to tell the difference between what is important and what is unimportant, and above all to combine many bits of information into a broad picture of the world.

In truth, this has been the ideal of western liberal education for centuries, but up till now even many western schools have been rather slack in fulfilling it. Teachers allowed themselves to focus on shoving data while encouraging pupils “to think for themselves”. Due to their fear of authoritarianism, liberal schools had a particular horror of grand narratives. They assumed that as long as we give students lots of data and a modicum of freedom, the students will create their own picture of the world, and even if this generation fails to synthesise all the data into a coherent and meaningful story of the world, there will be plenty of time to construct a good synthesis in the future. We have now run out of time. The decisions we will take in the next few decades will shape the future of life itself, and we can take these decisions based only on our present world view. If this generation lacks a comprehensive view of the cosmos, the future of life will be decided at random.

Part two: The heat is on

Besides information, most schools also focus too much on providing pupils with a set of predetermined skills such as solving differential equations, writing computer code in C++, identifying chemicals in a test tube or conversing in Chinese. Yet since we have no idea how the world and the job market will look in 2050, we don’t really know what particular skills people will need. We might invest a lot of effort teaching kids how to write in C++ or how to speak Chinese, only to discover that by 2050 AI can code software far better than humans, and a new Google Translate app enables you to conduct a conversation in almost flawless Mandarin, Cantonese or Hakka, even though you only know how to say “Ni hao”.

So what should we be teaching? Many pedagogical experts argue that schools should switch to teaching “the four Cs” – critical thinking, communication, collaboration and creativity. More broadly, schools should downplay technical skills and emphasise general-purpose life skills. Most important of all will be the ability to deal with change, to learn new things and to preserve your mental balance in unfamiliar situations. In order to keep up with the world of 2050, you will need not merely to invent new ideas and products – you will above all need to reinvent yourself again and again.

For as the pace of change increases, not just the economy, but the very meaning of “being human” is likely to mutate. In 1848, the Communist Manifesto declared that “all that is solid melts into air”. Marx and Engels, however, were thinking mainly about social and economic structures. By 2048, physical and cognitive structures will also melt into air, or into a cloud of data bits.

In 1848, millions of people were losing their jobs on village farms, and were going to the big cities to work in factories. But upon reaching the big city, they were unlikely to change their gender or to add a sixth sense. And if they found a job in some textile factory, they could expect to remain in that profession for the rest of their working lives.

By 2048, people might have to cope with migrations to cyberspace, with fluid gender identities, and with new sensory experiences generated by computer implants. If they find both work and meaning in designing up-to-the-minute fashions for a 3D virtual-reality game, within a decade not just this particular profession, but all jobs demanding this level of artistic creation might be taken over by AI. So at 25, you introduce yourself on a dating site as “a twenty-five-year-old heterosexual woman who lives in London and works in a fashion shop.” At 35, you say you are “a gender-non-specific person undergoing age- adjustment, whose neocortical activity takes place mainly in the NewCosmos virtual world, and whose life mission is to go where no fashion designer has gone before”. At 45, both dating and self-definitions are so passé. You just wait for an algorithm to find (or create) the perfect match for you. As for drawing meaning from the art of fashion design, you are so irrevocably outclassed by the algorithms, that looking at your crowning achievements from the previous decade fills you with embarrassment rather than pride. And at 45, you still have many decades of radical change ahead of you.

Please don’t take this scenario literally. Nobody can really predict the specific changes we will witness. Any particular scenario is likely to be far from the truth. If somebody describes to you the world of the mid-21st century and it sounds like science fiction, it is probably false. But then if somebody describes to you the world of the mid 21st-century and it doesn’t sound like science fiction – it is certainly false. We cannot be sure of the specifics, but change itself is the only certainty.

Such profound change may well transform the basic structure of life, making discontinuity its most salient feature. From time immemorial, life was divided into two complementary parts: a period of learning followed by a period of working. In the first part of life you accumulated information, developed skills, constructed a world view, and built a stable identity. Even if at 15 you spent most of your day working in the family’s rice field (rather than in a formal school), the most important thing you were doing was learning: how to cultivate rice, how to conduct negotiations with the greedy rice merchants from the big city and how to resolve conflicts over land and water with the other villagers. In the second part of life you relied on your accumulated skills to navigate the world, earn a living, and contribute to society. Of course, even at 50 you continued to learn new things about rice, about merchants and about conflicts, but these were just small tweaks to well-honed abilities.

By the middle of the 21st century, accelerating change plus longer lifespans will make this traditional model obsolete. Life will come apart at the seams, and there will be less and less continuity between different periods of life. “Who am I?” will be a more urgent and complicated question than ever before.

This is likely to involve immense levels of stress. For change is almost always stressful, and after a certain age most people just don’t like to change. When you are 15, your entire life is change. Your body is growing, your mind is developing, your relationships are deepening. Everything is in flux, and everything is new. You are busy inventing yourself. Most teenagers find it frightening, but at the same time, also exciting. New vistas are opening before you, and you have an entire world to conquer. By the time you are 50, you don’t want change, and most people have given up on conquering the world. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt. You much prefer stability. You have invested so much in your skills, your career, your identity and your world view that you don’t want to start all over again. The harder you’ve worked on building something, the more difficult it is to let go of it and make room for something new. You might still cherish new experiences and minor adjustments, but most people in their fifties aren’t ready to overhaul the deep structures of their identity and personality.

There are neurological reasons for this. Though the adult brain is more flexible and volatile than was once thought, it is still less malleable than the teenage brain. Reconnecting neurons and rewiring synapses is damned hard work. But in the 21st century, you can hardly afford stability. If you try to hold on to some stable identity, job or world view, you risk being left behind as the world flies by you with a whooooosh. Given that life expectancy is likely to increase, you might subsequently have to spend many decades as a clueless fossil. To stay relevant – not just economically, but above all socially – you will need the ability to constantly learn and to reinvent yourself, certainly at a young age like 50.

As strangeness becomes the new normal, your past experiences, as well as the past experiences of the whole of humanity, will become less reliable guides. Humans as individuals and humankind as a whole will increasingly have to deal with things nobody ever encountered before, such as super-intelligent machines, engineered bodies, algorithms that can manipulate your emotions with uncanny precision, rapid man-made climate cataclysms, and the need to change your profession every decade. What is the right thing to do when confronting a completely unprecedented situation? How should you act when you are flooded by enormous amounts of information and there is absolutely no way you can absorb and analyse it all? How to live in a world where profound uncertainty is not a bug, but a feature?

To survive and flourish in such a world, you will need a lot of mental flexibility and great reserves of emotional balance. You will have to repeatedly let go of some of what you know best, and feel at home with the unknown. Unfortunately, teaching kids to embrace the unknown and to keep their mental balance is far more difficult than teaching them an equation in physics or the causes of the first world war. You cannot learn resilience by reading a book or listening to a lecture. The teachers themselves usually lack the mental flexibility that the 21st century demands, for they themselves are the product of the old educational system.

The Industrial Revolution has bequeathed us the production-line theory of education. In the middle of town there is a large concrete building divided into many identical rooms, each room equipped with rows of desks and chairs. At the sound of a bell, you go to one of these rooms together with 30 other kids who were all born the same year as you. Every hour some grown-up walks in and starts talking. They are all paid to do so by the government. One of them tells you about the shape of the Earth, another tells you about the human past, and a third tells you about the human body. It is easy to laugh at this model, and almost everybody agrees that no matter its past achievements, it is now bankrupt. But so far we haven’t created a viable alter- native. Certainly not a scaleable alternative that can be implemented in rural Mexico rather than just in upmarket California suburbs.

Part three: Hacking humans

So the best advice I could give a 15-year-old stuck in an outdated school somewhere in Mexico, India or Alabama is: don’t rely on the adults too much. Most of them mean well, but they just don’t understand the world. In the past, it was a relatively safe bet to follow the adults, because they knew the world quite well, and the world changed slowly. But the 21st century is going to be different. Due to the growing pace of change, you can never be certain whether what the adults are telling you is timeless wisdom or outdated bias.

So on what can you rely instead? Technology? That’s an even riskier gamble. Technology can help you a lot, but if technology gains too much power over your life, you might become a hostage to its agenda. Thousands of years ago, humans invented agriculture, but this technology enriched just a tiny elite, while enslaving the majority of humans. Most people found themselves working from sunrise till sunset plucking weeds, carrying water buckets and harvesting corn under a blazing sun. It can happen to you too.

Technology isn’t bad. If you know what you want in life, technology can help you get it. But if you don’t know what you want in life, it will be all too easy for technology to shape your aims for you and take control of your life. Especially as technology gets better at understanding humans, you might increasingly find yourself serving it, instead of it serving you. Have you seen those zombies who roam the streets with their faces glued to their smartphones? Do you think they control the technology, or does the technology control them?

Should you rely on yourself, then? That sounds great on Sesame Street or in an old-fashioned Disney film, but in real life it doesn’t work so well. Even Disney is coming to realise it. Just like Inside Ou t’s Riley Andersen , most people hardly know themselves, and when they try to “listen to themselves” they easily become prey to external manipulations. The voice we hear inside our heads was never trustworthy, because it always reflected state propaganda, ideological brainwashing and commercial advertisement, not to mention biochemical bugs.

As biotechnology and machine learning improve, it will become easier to manipulate people’s deepest emotions and desires, and it will become more dangerous than ever to just follow your heart. When Coca-Cola, Amazon, Baidu or the government knows how to pull the strings of your heart and press the buttons of your brain, could you still tell the difference between your self and their marketing experts?

To succeed in such a daunting task, you will need to work very hard on getting to know your operating system better. To know what you are, and what you want from life. This is, of course, the oldest advice in the book: know thyself. For thousands of years, philosophers and prophets have urged people to know themselves. But this advice was never more urgent than in the 21st century, because unlike in the days of Laozi or Socrates, now you have serious competition. Coca-Cola, Amazon, Baidu and the government are all racing to hack you. Not your smartphone, not your computer, and not your bank account – they are in a race to hack you , and your organic operating system. You might have heard that we are living in the era of hacking computers, but that’s hardly half the truth. In fact, we are living in the era of hacking humans.

The algorithms are watching you right now. They are watching where you go, what you buy, who you meet. Soon they will monitor all your steps, all your breaths, all your heartbeats. They are relying on Big Data and machine learning to get to know you better and better. And once these algorithms know you better than you know yourself, they could control and manipulate you, and you won’t be able to do much about it. You will live in the matrix, or in The Truman Show . In the end, it’s a simple empirical matter: if the algorithms indeed understand what’s happening within you better than you understand it, authority will shift to them.

Of course, you might be perfectly happy ceding all authority to the algorithms and trusting them to decide things for you and for the rest of the world. If so, just relax and enjoy the ride. You don’t need to do anything about it. The algorithms will take care of everything. If, however, you want to retain some control of your personal existence and of the future of life, you have to run faster than the algorithms, faster than Amazon and the government, and get to know yourself before they do. To run fast, don’t take much luggage with you. Leave all your illusions behind. They are very heavy.

Yuval Noah Harari's 21 Lessons for the 21st Century (Vintage Digital) is published on August 30

This article was originally published by WIRED UK

Life in 2050: A Glimpse at Education in the Future

Thanks to growing internet access and emerging technologies, the way we think of education will dramatically change..

Matthew S. Williams

Welcome back to our “Life in 2050” series, where we examine how changes that are anticipated for the coming decades will alter the way people live their lives. In previous installments, we looked at how warfare , the economy , housing , and space exploration (which took two installments to cover!) will change by mid-century.

Today, we take a look at education and how social, economic, and technological changes will revolutionize the way children, youth, and adults go to school. Whereas modern education has generally followed the same model for over three hundred years, a transition is currently taking place that will continue throughout this century.

This transition is similar to what is also taking place in terms of governance, the economy, and recreation. In much the same way, the field of education will evolve in this century to adapt to four major factors. They include:

• Growing access to the internet
• Improvements in technology
• Distributed living and learning
• A new emphasis on problem-solving and gamification

The resulting seismic shift expected to occur by 2050 and after will be tantamount to a revolution in how we think about education and learning. Rather than a centralized structure where information is transmitted, and retention is tested, the classroom of the future is likely to be distributed in nature and far more hands-on.

To the next generations, education in the future will look a lot more like playtime than schooling!

A Time-Honored Model

Since the 19th century, public education has become far more widespread. In 1820, only 12% of people worldwide could read and write. As of 2016, that figure was reversed, where only 14% of the world’s population remained illiterate. Beyond basic literacy, the overall level of education has also increased steadily over time.

Since the latter half of the 20th century, secondary and post-secondary studies (university and college) have expanded considerably across the world. Between 1970 and 2020 , the percentage of adults with no formal education went from 23% to less than 10%; those with a partial (or complete) secondary education went from 16% to 36%; and those with a post-secondary education from about 3.3% to 10%.

Of course, there remains a disparity between the developing and developed world when it comes to education outcomes. According to data released in 2018 by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the percentage of people to graduate secondary school (among their 38 member nations) was 76.86% for men and 84.82% for women.

The same data indicated that among OECD nations, an average of 36.55% of the population (29.41% men and 44.10% women) received a post-secondary degree. This ranges from a Bachelor’s degree (24.07% men, 36.91% women) and a Master’s degree (10.5% men, 16.17% women) to a Ph.D. (less than 1% of men and women).

Despite this expansion in learning, the traditional model of education has remained largely unchanged since the 19th century. This model consists of people divided by age (grades), learning a standardized curriculum that is broken down by subject (maths, sciences, arts, social sciences, and athletics), and being subject to evaluation (quizzes, tests, final exam).

This model has been subject to revision and expansion over time, mainly in response to new technologies, socio-political developments, and economic changes. However, the structure has remained largely intact, with the institutions, curricula, and accreditation standards subject to centralized oversight and control.

Global Internet

According to a 2019 report compiled by the United Nations’ Department of Economic and Social Affairs — titled “ World Population Prospects 2019 ” — the global population is expected to reach 9.74 billion by mid-century. With a population of around 5.29 billion, Asia will still be the most populous continent on the planet.

However, it will be Africa that experiences the most growth between now and mid-century. Currently, Africa has a population of 1.36 billion, which is projected to almost double by 2050 — reaching up to 2.5 billion (an increase of about 83%). This population growth will be mirrored by economic growth, which will then drive another sort of growth.

According to a 2018 report by the UN’s International Telecommunication Union (ITU), 90% of the global population will have access to broadband internet services by 2050, thanks to the growth of mobile devices and satellite internet services . That’s 8.76 billion people, a 220% increase over the 4 billion people (about half of the global population) that have access right now.

The majority of these new users will come from the “developing nations,” meaning countries in Africa, South America, and Oceania. Therefore, the internet of the future will be far more representative of the global population as more stories, events, and trends that drive online behavior come from outside of Europe and North America.

Similarly, the internet will grow immensely as trillions of devices, cameras, sensors, homes, and cities are connected to the internet — creating a massive expansion in the “ Internet of Things .” Given the astronomical amount of data that this will generate on a regular basis, machine learning and AI will be incorporated to keep track of it all, find patterns in the chaos, and even predict future trends.

AI will also advance thanks to research into the human brain and biotechnology, which will lead to neural net computing that is much closer to the real thing. Similarly, this research will lead to more advanced versions of Neuralink , neural implants that will help remedy neurological disorders and brain injuries, and also allow for brain-to-machine interfacing.

This means that later in this century, people will be able to perform all the tasks they rely on their computers for, but in a way that doesn’t require a device. For those who find the idea of neural implants unsettling or repugnant, computing will still be possible using smart glasses, smart contact lenses , and wearable computers .

From Distance Ed to MOOCs

In the past year, the coronavirus and resulting school closures have been a major driving force for the growth of online learning. However, the trend towards decentralization was underway long before that, with virtual classrooms and online education experiencing considerable growth over the past decade.

In fact, a report compiled in February of 2020 by Research and Markets indicated that by 2025, the online education market would be valued at about $320 billion USD . This represents a growth of 170% — and a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 9.23% since 2019 when the e-learning industry was valued at $187.87 billion USD .

What’s more, much of this growth will be powered by economic progress and rising populations in the developing nations (particularly in Africa, Asia, and South America). Already, online education is considered a cost-effective means to address the rising demand for education in developing nations.

As Stefan Trines, a research editor with the World Education News & Reviews, explained in an op-ed he penned in August of 2018 :

“While still embryonic, digital forms of education will likely eventually be pursued in the same vein as traditional distance learning models and the privatization of education, both of which have helped increase access to education despite concerns over educational quality and social equality.

“Distance education already plays a crucial role in providing access to education for millions of people in the developing world. Open distance education universities in Bangladesh, India, Iran, Pakistan, South Africa, and Turkey alone currently enroll more than 7 million students combined.”

While barriers remain in the form of technological infrastructure (aka. the “digital divide”), the growth of internet access in the next few decades will be accompanied by an explosion in online learning. Another consequence will be the proliferation of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) and other forms of e-learning, which will replace traditional distance education.

Here too, the growth in the past few years has been very impressive (and indicative of future trends). Between 2012 and 2018 , the number of MOOCs available increased by more than 683%, while the total number of students enrolled went from 10 million (in 2013) to 81 million, and the number of universities offering them increased by 400% (from 200 to 800).

Between 2020 and 2050 , the number of people without any formal education will decline from 10% to 5% of the global population. While the number of people with a primary and lower secondary education is expected to remain largely the same, the number of people with secondary education is projected to go from 21% to 29% and post-secondary education from 11% to 18.5%.

For developing nations, distributed learning systems will offer a degree of access and flexibility that traditional education cannot. This is similar to the situation in many remote areas of the world, where the necessary infrastructure doesn’t always exist (i.e., roads, school buses, schoolhouses, etc.).

New Technologies & New Realities

Along with near-universal internet access, there are a handful of technologies that will make education much more virtual, immersive, and hands-on. These include augmented reality (AR), virtual reality (VR), haptics , cloud computing, and machine learning (AI). Together, advances in these fields will be utilized to enhance education.

By definition, AR refers to interactions with physical environments that are enhanced with the help of computer-mediated images and sounds, while VR consists of interacting with computer-generated simulated environments. However, by 2050, the line between simulated and physical will be blurred to the point where they are barely distinguishable.

This will be possible thanks to advances in “haptics,” which refers to technology that stimulates the senses. Currently, this technology is limited to stimulating the sensation of touch and the perception of motion. By 2050, however, haptics, AR, and VR are expected to combine in a way that will be capable of creating totally realistic immersive environments.

These environments will stimulate the five major senses (sight, sound, touch, taste, smell) as well as somatosensory perception — pressure, pain, temperature, etc. For students, this could mean simulations that allow the student to step into a moment in history and to see and feel what it was like to live in another time and place — with proper safety measures (let’s not forget that history is full of violence!).

This technology could extend beyond virtual environments and allow students the opportunity to visit places all around the globe and experience what it feels like to actually be there. It’s even possible that this technology will be paired with remote-access robotic hosts so students can physically interact with the local environment and people.

Cloud computing will grow in tandem with increased internet access, leading to an explosion in the amount of data that a classroom generates and has access to. The task of managing this data will be assisted by machine learning algorithms and classroom AIs that will keep track of student tasks, learning, retention, and assess their progress.

New & Personalized Curriculums

In fact, AI-driven diagnostic assessments are likely to replace traditional grading, tests, and exams as the primary means of measuring student achievement. Rather than being given letter grades or pass/fail evaluations, students will need to fulfill certain requirements in order to unlock new levels in their education.

The ease with which students can connect to classrooms will also mean that teachers will no longer need to be physically present in a classroom. By 2050, “ virtual teacher ” is likely to become an actual job description! Ongoing progress in the field of AI and social robotics is also likely to result in classrooms that are led by virtual or robotic teachers and education assistants.

Speaking of robotics, emerging technologies and the shifting nature of work in the future will be reflected in the kinds of tasks students perform. For this reason, students are sure to spend a significant portion of their lessons learning how to code and build robots , take apart and reassemble complex machines, and other tasks that will enhance their STEM skills.

Other professions that emerge between now and 2050 are also likely to have an impact on student education. Given their importance to future generations, students are sure to learn about additive manufacturing (3D printing), space travel, renewable energy, and how to create virtual environments, blockchains , and digital applications .

In addition to adapting to new demands, school curriculums are likely to become a lot more decentralized as a result of technological changes. On the one hand, schools are likely to abandon compartmentalized study — math, science, language, literature, social studies, etc. — in favor of more blended learning activities that cut across these boundaries.

Gaming, Problem Solving, & Incentives

Another major change is the way education is expected to become “gamified.” This is the philosophy behind Ad Astra , a private school created by Elon Musk and educator Joshua Dahn for Musk’s children and those of SpaceX’s employees. Since then, this school has given way to Astra Nova , which follows the same philosophy, but is open to the general public.

With their emphasis on destructured learning and focus on problem-solving, these schools provide something of a preview for what education will look like down the road. As Musk remarked in a  2013 interview with Sal Khan, founder of the online education platform Khan Academy :

“What is education? You’re basically downloading data and algorithms into your brain. And it’s actually amazingly bad in conventional education because it shouldn’t be like this huge chore… The more you can gamify the process of learning, the better. For my kids, I don’t have to encourage them to play video games. I have to pry them out of their hands.”

This approach is similar to the Montessori method of education , where students engage in self-directed learning activities in a supportive and well-equipped environment. While many practices have come to be included under the heading of “Montessori school,” the general idea is to avoid using highly structured and transmission-based methods.

Combined with cutting-edge technology, this same philosophy is projected to become far more widespread and will be possible without the need for physical classrooms, schools, textbooks, etc. In this respect, it is the Synthesis School , another spin-off of Ad Astra, that provides the closest approximation of what the future of education will be like.

The Synthesis School is an open-access educational platform that takes the problem-solving and gamified approach of Ad Astra and Astra Nova and makes it available as an enrichment activity to the entire world (for a fee). In the future, children and youths from all over the world could be following the same process: Logging in from just about anywhere, forming groups, and playing games that develop our faculties.

The growing use of cryptocurrencies and non-fungible tokens (NFTs) will also have an effect on schooling. In terms of the future economy, these technologies could replace traditional fiat money and banking. But in education, they could facilitate an entirely new system of reward and punishment.

Here too, Ad Astra and Astra Nova offer a preview of what this might look like. In these schools, students are encouraged to earn and trade a unit of currency called the “ Astra .” This system is designed to reward students for good behavior while also teaching them about money management and entrepreneurship.

By 2050, the majority of students around the world may no longer have to physically go to school in order to get an education. Instead, they will be able to log in from their home, a common room in their building, or a dedicated space in their community. From there, they will join students from all around the world and engage in problem-solving tasks, virtual tours, and hands-on activities.

For hundreds of millions of students, this will represent a chance to at a brighter future for themselves and others. For many children, it will be an opportunity to learn about the world beyond their front door and how to facilitate the kind of changes that will benefit us all.

RECOMMENDED ARTICLES

For others, the transformation of education that is anticipated in the coming decades is a chance to fulfill the dream of countless generations. As long as education has existed as a formal institution, educators have wrestled with questions regarding the best way to impart knowledge, foster intellectual acumen, and inspire future leaders.

As Socrates famously said, “Education is the kindling of a flame, not the filling of a vessel.” Through technology that allows us to create education that is tailored to the individual, universal in nature, and decentralized in structure, we may finally have found the means for ensuring that every student finds their path to success.

The Blueprint Daily

Stay up-to-date on engineering, tech, space, and science news with The Blueprint.

By clicking sign up, you confirm that you accept this site's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

ABOUT THE EDITOR

Matthew S. Williams Matthew S Williams is an author, a writer for Universe Today, and the curator of their Guide to Space section. His works include sci-fi/mystery The Cronian Incident and his articles have been featured in Phys.org, HeroX, Popular Mechanics, Business Insider, Gizmodo, and IO9, ScienceAlert, Knowridge Science Report, and Real Clear Science, with topics ranging from astronomy and Earth sciences to technological innovation and environmental issues. He is also a former educator and a 5th degree Black Belt Tae Kwon Do instructor. He lives on Vancouver Island with his wife and family.  

POPULAR ARTICLES

Low-cost epr sensor on chip to boost quality control of food products, world’s only privately-owned f-16 fighter jet gets infrared search capability, in a first, two us air force’s f-35a lightning jets land on highway in finland, winged guardian: hawk hired to tackle ‘pest birds’ menace at uk waste site, related articles.

Light-trapping trick offers ultrathin solar cells with 28.2% high photocurrent

US hypersonic test vehicle pierces Norway sky at 7 times the speed of sound

New gene therapy boosts vision up to 10,000 times in rare eye disease patients

Shapeshifting aircraft could be possible with new alloy that stretches 20 times

Keep up to date with the Big Issue

The leading voice on life, politics, culture and social activism direct to your inbox.

What will the world look like in 2050?

2050 is the target set for the world to reach net zero greenhouse gas emissions. So what would the world look like if we get it all right? And what if we get it wrong?

Will the world in 2050 be an overheated smoggy mess? Or will we have global warming under control? ILlustraion by James Mackay

The agreements made – or not made – at COP26 will determine the future of the planet and all its inhabitants for decades to come. For some the target of net zero emissions by 2050 is achievable. For others impractical. 

If the world can successfully curb its emissions, the planet will stay within the 1.5C of warming agreed at the 2015 Paris climate accords and we can avoid the worst impacts of climate change. Fail to do so, and we’re headed for a planet well over 2C warmer, with catastrophic consequences. 

Most of us know the numbers by now, but down these two pathways, what might life actually look like in the decades to come? We spoke to climate experts with specialisms across fashion, society, architecture and diet to envision a day in the life in 2050 – in the best and worst case scenarios for the planet. 

2050: Best-case scenario

The world stuck to its climate ambitions and successfully drove down greenhouse gas emissions from 2020 onwards. Most countries including the UK achieved net zero emissions on target, but historical greenhouse gases mean that the Earth is now 1.3 degrees warmer than pre-industrial temperatures. 

It’s 6am when your sleep assistant wakes you by tuning into the radio and gradually dialling up the brightness of your bedside lamp. When you bought it, the shop assistant promised the device would monitor your sleep rhythms and rouse you at the optimal moment. Judging by your grogginess, you’ve been ripped off. 

It’s early December and there’s a chill in the air, so you reach up to the control panel above your bed and click the heating on. Two floors below, you hear the heat pump whirr and your well-insulated room quickly fills with warm air. The DJ plays a teaser track from Adele’s upcoming album, 60 , as you throw on a robe and marvel at her stamina.

Pulling back the curtains, you’re relieved to see that the two straight weeks of torrential rain has finally ceased, with the sun now straining through a thin grey cloud. The radio news bulletin says last week’s flooding almost breached barriers in York and parts of London. You think of Susan, who came to the co-living complex a decade ago after her home in Fairborne, Wales, was reclaimed by the sea. You feel lucky to have chosen to live here. Most of your housemates have stories like this – hurricanes, wildfires, floods and typhoons forcing them from their homes. 

Your thoughts are interrupted by the smell of bacon wafting in from the kitchen. The best cook in the building is on breakfast duties. Today’s meal is a plate of toast, “fake-on”, (70 per cent lab-grown meat, 30 per cent pea protein) spinach and a couple of eggs from the coop in the buildings’ shared garden. Meat is a rare treat these days. When you do have it, it’s usually produced in a lab and mixed with alternative proteins. The bread is homemade, courtesy of the retirees living in your building whose enthusiasm for baking just about makes up for the endless nostalgia for the “good old days” of snow at Christmas and diesel cars. 

You’ve been living here for five years now and, bar one odd housemate who only ever emerges at night, you get along well with everyone. Co-living complexes with shared communal facilities first sprung up in the 2030s, when the climate crisis began displacing millions and developers were forced to innovate. At first the goal was extra space, but over time complexes went a long way to easing loneliness, community tensions and, thanks to government-subsidised rent, social inequalities.

Your housemates linger in the kitchen after breakfast. As it’s Friday, most have now finished their four-day week and will head off to various volunteering projects during the day. 

For most, the five-day week is a distant memory. The first time the four-day week was rolled out it was an emergency measure to reduce carbon footprints , but today, 80 per cent of the workforce enjoy a three-day weekend. Originally, mass rollout saw a big push to encourage volunteering on the free day, though you personally enjoy using your Monday off to lie horizontally on the sofa.  

The constant rain has been irritating, but it does mean no faffing with spare water supply for your shower. The water for bathing comes from a rainwater tank on the roof, which trickles through the pipes to be heated and treated before coming out of the shower head. 

Pushing for time now, you finish up, hurry back to your room and pull on some clothes. Your jeans are a “lifetime” pair bought in 2030, with the distressed finish produced by lasers instead of the water-intensive methods once used in the early 2000s. The shirt you pull over your head is made from recycled orange peel, and your anorak is second hand, lined with fleece made from old plastic bottles . Your boots are vintage leather, exchanged for a pair of brogues at a swap shop down the road. 

You don’t own as many clothes as you used to. Vintage, second hand and independent retailers dominate the market, and huge discounts on new clothes are available for taking unwanted garments back to clothing stores, who either sell them on or upcycle them into new life. Thanks to the success of a huge public campaign some years back, the old re-use, repair and recycle mentality has returned, with schools making sustainability – and needlework – a core part of the curriculum. 

Once dressed, you briefly contemplate taking your bike to work but decide the risk of getting stuck behind the school “bike bus” isn’t worth it. You open your Ryder app instead. In almost every big city now, some variation of this app allows you to hitch a ride with others going in the same direction, keeping millions of cars off the road. There’s three people going your way, so you tap the one with the most normal-looking profile picture (sorry, Mr Lycra) and head out to wait by the building’s charging points.

You’re picked up by a chatty woman from the local area who tells you all about her recent holiday on a high-speed inter-rail ticket. Since railway-building accelerated in the late 2020s, international trains are fast, cheap and appealing. Plane travel hasn’t stopped, but it has shrunk dramatically, with flights now relying mostly on hydrogen fuel and domestic journeys banned. Like almost every car on the road, the one you’re travelling in today is electric. 

You whizz past the high street and watch local cafe owners roll back the covers over their outdoor seating for the first time in weeks. The area is already teeming with families, dog walkers and joggers, all with plenty of space to move since pedestrian and cycle space was vastly expanded into the road. 

The “15-minute city” hasn’t emerged perfectly everywhere, but amenities, shops and entertainment are accessible without a car for most people, meaning local business has boomed. In city centres where footfall declined, empty shops were given over to arts and charity organisations to create extra space for culture, leisure and community services. 

Green space is everywhere you look thanks to the urban forests planted long ago to soak up carbon and cool the intense summer temperatures that strike cities every summer. The air is cleaner. Long-gone wildlife is returning, and a complex system of fences and sensors has been devised to keep as many animals as possible away from the roads, where quiet electric car motors can often prove deadly. 

After a short ride, you’re dropped off by the shuttle boat that takes you out to the offshore wind farm where you’ve worked as a turbine engineer for the last couple of decades. When wind farms started cropping up in enormous numbers off Britain’s coastlines years ago, naysayers complained that they were spoiling the view. When gas shortages started crippling those same households, they soon fell silent. 

Your working day finishes around six and you grab a bus home, where a vegetable box has been delivered to your doorstep by the local farm. Thanks to droughts and crop failures around the world, supermarket shortages are not uncommon, but an increased reliance on seasonal British-grown produce provides a degree of food stability.

You take the box inside, thinking back in disbelief to the days when fruit came individually wrapped in plastic. The ocean remains full of it to this day, but single-use plastic has been almost entirely phased out of production processes, and mass cleanup operations are underway to remove as much as possible from global water supply. 

Your evening plans involve a drink at a local bar with a friend. Ever since pedestrians claimed back vast swathes of cities, street lighting has been vastly improved, and footfall is high even at night. You know your neighbours and feel safe walking alone to the bar, where you sit down with your friend and order two glasses of 2040 English wine. 

You feel a little guilty when the drinks arrive, remembering that where parts of England won better climes for wine-growing out of the climate crisis, parts of the Mediterranean have burned. As ever, the conversation quickly turns to these unluckier parts of the world, and those nations who have unfairly paid the price for emissions produced by wealthier countries.

Things are by no means perfect, but the world is a far better place than it would have been had leaders failed to hit the brakes on emissions in the 2020s. Bit by bit, the Earth is getting cleaner and greener, and in time, scientists say temperatures will begin climbing back down. 

2050: Worst-case scenario

2050: countries around the world failed to achieve their  climate ambitions , and  greenhouse gas emissions  continued to rise from 2020 onwards. The Earth is now 2.4 degrees warmer than pre-industrial temperatures, wreaking havoc on the climate and environment.  

You can’t remember if it was the wind rattling your window or the coughing from the next room that woke you up first, but either way you’ve been sitting up in bed for half an hour.

A friend of yours, Layla, and her son Daniel have been staying in your flat since their home in Hull flooded. She’d bought the house 20 years ago, putting faith in a developer’s promise that living on a flood plain presented “minimal risk of damage” when accounting for flood barriers .

A few weeks ago, those barriers were breached overnight. Layla’s insurance company was overwhelmed with claims for damage and folded, leaving her with nowhere to go. Daniel’s asthma had flared up since the incident, and the high pollution levels on your street aren’t helping his cough.

Still, you think, it could be worse. The UK’s botched transition to an electric vehicle fleet was at least an attempt. In the US, the driving lobby dug in their heels (thanks, Trump 2024) and driving gas powered cars became the next target of the culture wars. Americans who once complained about masking up for coronavirus now cover their faces for fear of destroying their lungs.

As you’re thinking this, your phone beeps with today’s pollution alert. Medium is the best it’s been in a while, you think optimistically, as you switch on the news.

You’re not really sure why you do this anymore – perhaps a sense of obligation. Or perhaps to try and remind yourself how much worse things could be. Every day another disaster, every day people forced from their homes by fires, floods and hurricanes. Aid organisations do their best, but the relentless onslaught of crises makes it difficult to respond quickly enough. A pang of guilt strikes as you remember cancelling your direct debit to a disaster relief fund last week. After losing your job, you just couldn’t afford it anymore.

As if this isn’t bad enough, the newsreader moves onto a light news segment on the celebrities who have “come together” to sing Lean on Me in the hopes of bringing “light” to the victims of the latest hurricane in the Philippines. You think bitterly about the multi-million dollar bunkers these people have underground for when things really get truly terrible – though you question whether being locked in there with them would be worth it.

Your flat, a converted Victorian townhouse, was never properly insulated after the collapse of the government’s “build back blazing” voucher scheme in 2023. On wintry days like today, the cold air creeps up through the floorboards and numbs your toes. Your roof was fitted with solar panels years back, but the manufacturer cut corners and opted for cheap flimsy materials which failed to account for the increasingly extreme weather you’re now experiencing in the UK: winters of extreme rainfall and summers of extreme heat. You flick on the boiler – still powered by gas – and pull up the blinds.

#GreenhouseGas Bulletin has a stark, scientific message for #COP26 Current rate of CO2 increase ➡️ ⬆️temperature by end of the century far above #ParisAgreement targets of 1.5 to 2°C ➡️ More extreme weather, sea level rise, impacts on food and water security, ecosystems etc pic.twitter.com/JRTONZNSOL — World Meteorological Organization (@WMO) October 25, 2021

The street outside is strewn with placards and the shop window opposite has been shattered. You’re surprised the commotion didn’t wake you up. It’s hard to remember a time when people weren’t protesting , and even harder to remember exactly what they’re protesting about anymore – there’s so much to be angry about. For your own part, you’re just weary.

You remember your guests and pop your head into the living room, offering them breakfast with the sheepish caveat that the options might be limited .

It’s now hard to obtain certain fruits and vegetables – like bananas – once common in the UK. Fish stocks have been depleted to the brink of extinction and meat is often prohibitively expensive, though global instability means prices fluctuate too often to keep track.

Vast swathes of once habitable, arable land across Africa, South America and Australasia are agricultural deserts, with more regions edging closer to the brink every day. As a result, supermarket shelves are regularly bare , though local community gardens – founded years ago in the spirit of self-sufficiency – try to help where they can.

Scraping together the contents of your fridge and pantry, you manage coffee and beans on toast, serving it up apologetically. The other day, you heard a positive news story about new agricultural opportunities opening up in Greenland and Antarctica now the ice is gone, though you cynically wonder who’ll start the next war to claim it.

Over a million people in the south of Madagascar are being denied their human right to a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment. New report on the human rights impact of climate change in drought-stricken southern Madagascar, out tomorrow. #ClimateActionMada pic.twitter.com/395vAqIMkj — AmnestySouthernAfrica (@AmnestySARO) October 26, 2021

Over breakfast, you chat about the ongoing employment crisis. While the UK has been protected from the worst climate-related impacts of global warming, worldwide instability has repeatedly tanked the economy. During the most recent recession, you heard stories of people opening their banking app to find the bank had collapsed overnight – taking their savings with it.

With little to do since you lost your job, you offer to take Daniel to the GP about his cough while Layla works from home, clinging by a thread to her own career. Like several medicines, the kind Daniel once relied on to treat his chronic asthma are in short supply. Regular flooding of roads slows delivery of nearly everything, and, more alarmingly, the natural resources from which many chemicals are extracted have been wholly or partway destroyed.

Your wardrobe is what it ever was – a jumble of cheaply-made, inexpensive clothes . Even when Ghana and Pakistan stopped agreeing to take shipments of Britain’s discarded garments and they began piling up in landfills at home, it didn’t stop the fashion giants from peddling £1 dresses for one-time wear. You pull on a jumper and jeans and head out to the car.

Electric cars are the norm now, though a failure to install sufficient charging points early in the transition drove thousands of frustrated drivers back to petrol. Perhaps worse than the petrol-heads, though, are the wealthy drivers of electric SUVs who drive them faster, further and more dangerously than they ever did prior to electric power. Poorly-placed charging points have further squeezed pedestrian space, making some pavements impossible to walk on. Outdated infrastructure means buses and trains are constantly late, delayed or cancelled.

85% of fast fashion ends up in landfills. It's a disaster for the planet https://t.co/G14Tv7CLxN #BlackFriday #buynothingday pic.twitter.com/hK0QvSN97D — Greenpeace International (@Greenpeace) November 25, 2016

The doctor’s trip is futile. Medical professionals are so overwhelmed with new conditions and mental health crises these days that they’re squeezing two appointments into five-minute slots. The GP writes Daniel a prescription you know the local pharmacy doesn’t have in stock.

Still, it’s not raining when you emerge, so you drive through the city centre to the nearest local forest. You pass the once-buzzing high street, all now converted into hundreds of rabbit-hutch flats . You remember once visiting a friend there who lived without natural light among hundreds of others with nowhere else to go.

The walk through the forest is pleasant enough, and you visit the tree you planted yourself there, decades prior. Back then, airlines and large companies deluded the country into thinking any amount of carbon was acceptable if a forest was planted to offset it. What they failed to account for was the wildfires that came for Britain as summers heated up and peat burning continued.  

The forest is eerily quiet, you think to yourself as you wander through the trees. Once upon a time, this area was teeming with animal life. Nobody could bring themselves to care when the insects first started disappearing , but it wasn’t long afterwards that the impact cascaded through the food chain, killing birds and mammals in turn.  

It was like this every time some milestone was passed, you think, trying to place your finger on the point of no return. It’s not like there weren’t warnings. Throughout the early 2000s entire species went extinct, the Amazon was logged for wood, coral reefs died and ice caps melted. The outrage was brief and fleeting and politicians shook their heads then went back to business as usual. The public didn’t want to know, or didn’t care, or some combination of both.

Perhaps sensing your thoughts, Daniel turns and asks what the forest used to be like as you head back towards the car. You answer in vague terms about birds and picnics and tree-planting. All the way home, you’re plagued by the thought that none of this was inevitable. 

With thanks to UK Research and Innovation, a non-departmental public body and COP26 sponsor ; Professor Jane Harris, the director of research and innovation at the London College of Fashion; Professor Jeremy Till, architecture expert and head of Central Saint Martins University Arts London; Professor Glen Lyons, professor of future mobility at UWE Bristol; Dr Christian Reynolds, senior lecturer at the Centre for Food Policy, City University, London; and Professor Dan Lunt, professor of climate science, at the school of geographical sciences, University of Bristol, for their contributions and insight for this article.

While you’re here…

The Big Issue has co-launched a new fund that invests ONLY in companies working to solve the climate crisis and help to create a cleaner, more sustainable world. The focus is on what can be done NOW for future generations. 

In partnership with Aberdeen Standard Investments, the Multi-Asset Climate Solutions (MACS) Fund actively scours the globe for companies that get at least half of their revenue from climate change solutions and other key environmental challenges. Currently, less than five per cent of the world’s companies fit the bill.

From renewable energy and green buildings to electric vehicles and remote working technologies, the fund invests in companies that are enabling the transition to a low carbon economy.

A Climate Advisory Group that includes Nigel Kershaw, Chair of The Big Issue Group, as well as respected environmental, policy and finance experts and climate activists has been established to make sure the fund does what it is supposed to do. It is proof that the fund is not a tokenistic step.

20 per cent of the net revenue goes back into The Big Issue to support its social mission .

To find out more about the MACS Fund go to  bigexchange.com  or  abrdn.com . 

Learn more about further Big Issue work for Future Generations, through John Bird’s Future Generations Bill currently working through Westminster, see  bigissue.com/today-for-tomorrow

• Climate crisis

Subscribe to your local Big Issue vendor

Recommended for you

UK won't reach net zero without carbon capture – so why do we keep 'screwing it up'?

This mum used to watch her son 'struggle for breath'. After a year of Ulez, things are much better

Outcry after water companies say they can't fix the sewage crisis without hiking bills: 'Insulting'

Windermere was flooded with 8,787 hours of raw sewage last year. One man is fighting back

Most popular.

Renters pay their landlords' buy-to-let mortgages, so they should get a share of the profits

Exclusive: Disabled people are 'set up to fail' by the DWP in target-driven disability benefits system, whistleblowers reveal

Cost of living payment 2024: Where to get help now the scheme is over

Strike dates 2023: From train drivers to NHS doctors, here are the dates to know

What America Could Look Like in 2050

“I feel like it is a race, and I do not have the crystal ball to see the outcome,” one reader argues.

Welcome to Up for Debate. Each week, Conor Friedersdorf rounds up timely conversations and solicits reader responses to one thought-provoking question. Later, he publishes some thoughtful replies. Sign up for the newsletter here.

Last week I asked readers, what will America be like in 2050?

Replies have been edited for length and clarity.

JP anticipates a decline in faith:

America in 2050 will be a lot less religious, and will have fewer church structures. I am 31 and work at a church. Many churches, including ours, are still running on the “old church model” (my term) that has been established over the last 300+ years: building large structures, asking for donations or passing the basket, and driving engagement by appealing to people’s sense of duty or obligation. We know that a transition needs to take place, because in the next 25 years, we are going to lose a lot of believers to old age. What will we do without these volunteers and donors? Churches will begin to feel less like large institutions, and more like small, tight-knit communities. As a result, religion, and especially Christianity, will have a much smaller impact on public discourse and culture.

Ian expects racial and ethnic integration:

Despite the ever-present racism and xenophobia, America will find itself more blended. The right will still be unwilling to admit that this diversity and blending has made our nation stronger, not weaker. But extremism on both the right and left will still make the most noise. Division and hatred inspire events that are newsworthy, and the media will make the most of it. People will see the folly of 24-hour networks that are more opinion than news.

Caro is 80 years old and pessimistic about the future:

I won’t be around to see 2050. I could be sad about that but I am not optimistic enough to believe things will be “better” than they are today as far as being a shining beacon of democracy. Our country has prized independent thinking and living so much so that it treats innovation as the end, not the means. Innovation just happens (in cars, computers, global trade, wars) because it can, and without regard for the long-term good of Earth. We live with the consequences of our desires to create “better living” for just us humans and not the full environment we live in (take the microscopic plastic present on every part of the planet). When people can’t cooperate in devising ways to cope, they seek protection of a power that doesn’t require cooperation. That is the scariest thing in my country that I see.

Ben’s outlook is sunnier:

I expect shifts in U.S. industrial policy ushered in during the last two years will have a profound effect on the size and shape of the U.S. economy. Renewable energy will become a much larger part of our industrial portfolio, which will have downstream effects. Checks, cash, and other forms of “paper” monetary transactions will either be extinct or very rare. An 11-year-old today will be 38 in 2050; the likelihood that generation will ever write a check, own a landline, or pay for cable is vanishingly small. Therefore we can also expect that any existing cable-TV enterprises will only exist through a streaming service (which could manifest in a variety of forms) or otherwise cease to exist. We will continue to see a backlash against big business and a continuing momentum for labor movements. I don’t see any way our children will embrace current-gen social media, data economies, and monopolies with the same naive enthusiasm as previous generations. We will all be “online,” but whatever “online” looks like will not be the same. I see most of these developments as net positives. But I also think that there will be some pains our society will be healing from in 2050 that haven’t yet happened. If you follow the trajectory of American politics from the 90s to today, there is a pretty clear through line that suggests the GOP is going to cause—and experience—a lot more pain and chaos before they get better. It’s very difficult to see what their end state will be, but the logic of the MAGA movement is escalatory by nature. Things will keep getting worse until some calamity forces a shift. In an ideal world, that “calamity” could simply take the form of massive electoral defeats, but we are in no way guaranteed that outcome.

Abraham speculates about changes in land use:

The nation is poised to become a more densely populated and urbanized landscape, with real-estate prices in cities beginning to find stability. While cities today have relied on land-use regulations that date back decades, a shift toward more liberal land-use policy will take place, fueled by rising real-estate prices which will gradually affect a broader spectrum of the middle class. A significant pivot will be noticed when property values begin to impact particularly high-skilled professionals, such as engineers and attorneys. In response, local city councils are likely to modify many established development norms such as minimum lot sizes, the emphasis on single-family zoning, and parking standards. Cities will become more internally focused. The era of regionalism will draw to a close, with local leaders putting an emphasis on retaining resources within their city limits. It will become evident to municipalities that subsidizing infrastructure to support long commutes or suburban residents is not efficient or sustainable. Instead, the spotlight will shift toward optimizing resources and infrastructure within city confines for the benefit and pleasure of its residents, and a serious focus on attracting even more residents. Cities will still be stratified economically, but a silver lining will emerge as construction and development projects are more easily greenlit, offering a semblance of relief. On the other hand, residents of rural regions are set to face significant economic headwinds. As wealthier individuals, equipped with comprehensive remote-work options, opt to flee away from what they perceive as congested urban centers, they will migrate toward these “quieter” locales. This migration will amplify the demand in these areas, driving up property values. The prevailing land-use policies in these regions will remain largely centered on single-family residences. Limited employment opportunities combined with a deeply entrenched, well-financed resistance to change will further exacerbate the financial situation for residents here. Even as urban areas begin to achieve real-estate stability, suburban and exurban localities will experience heightened real-estate market pressures. The residents of these areas, particularly those without the means to adapt, will feel the economic strain even worse than they do today.

Dana expects huge catastrophes and heartening adaptations to them:

Sadly, I think the coastal cities will be underwater due to sea levels rising far faster than expected. Many species will be extinct. No more polar bears or penguins. Farmers will have robotic bees because the real bees will be dead. Interest will be removed from existing student loans, and college and grad school will be free. A quarter of the country will be dead or disabled due to having had COVID 12 to 20 times. All houses and buildings will test someone’s breath for two seconds and detect if there’s any contagious virus before allowing the person to enter. Medical technology will grow with the help of AI and quantum processing, so aging will be much better, cancer cured, and some people will have a life span up to 120. Ageism will cease to exist because people will look in their 30s even if they are 95. Everywhere, public and private, will have video and DNA surveillance so crime will become almost exclusively cyber. The education pendulum will start swinging back to children actually being expected to learn, and parents being expected to be responsible for their children. Capitalism will no longer be unbridled greed, as everyone has to do their part for saving the planet. Items will be made to last for years or decades. Community responsibility, pensions, and companies caring about their employees will make a comeback. Racism will no longer exist, as proof of sentient alien life will change the world’s outlook as we all become earthlings. We’ll begin to try to bring back polar bears, penguins, bees, etc. as we finally understand what matters and that we’re (“we” being everything living) all in this together.

John sketches optimistic and pessimistic scenarios:

The race in America between our better angels and lesser demons may be close to the end. I believe we are in a constant race between our rational, entrepreneurial, scientific efforts to build a better union and country and the demons attempting to tear it all down. But I feel like some technology advances in the near term will determine if there is a winner of this race. From climate change to health care, we Americans have the tools to make the world a better place and keep America a great nation. I can imagine fusion power moving the curve on CO2 emissions. I can imagine AI causing all kinds of strife, but our society moderates the worst outcomes with some positive benefits. Tailored, genetic-based health care could greatly extend the lengths of good, healthy lives. But ... if we don’t fix some serious problems, America is going to be smaller (due to sea-level rising), much hotter, even angrier somehow, and probably partitioned in some meaningful way. Again, I feel like it is a race, and I do not have the crystal ball to see the outcome.

Zack envisions his own retirement:

The year is 2050. I boot up my iPhone 11. Damn grandkids wouldn’t even know how to work a fine piece of technology like this. They just rub dopamine-infused goo directly on their brains (this goo has replaced entertainment entirely). I tap on the Atlantic app. I scroll past three pieces about how this upcoming election is The Most Important of Our Lives. I begin reading an article saying that November 2050 is set to be the hottest on record. “Bah, the weather is fine,” I say to myself in my fully underwater Palm Beach retirement community. The Amazon Alexa Surveillance Device is blasting my favorite oldies with only occasional ads. “ Bring a bucket and a mop for this wet ––350 SPF SUNSCREEN ONLY $75.99. STAY SAFE THIS WINTER. Give me everything you got for this wet —14 TIKTOK STARS WHO HAVE AGED TERRIBLY. CLICK HERE NOW.” My wife is in the kitchen cooking my favorite meal: high-fructose corn syrup. Life is good.

Paul is even more dystopian in his outlook:

Earth will be running out of drinking water. This will include the United States. Lack of water will cause food shortages. Neighbors will be fighting each other for food and drinking water. No one will offer any solutions before this happens because we are too self-centered. 2050 will be too late to change the results of climate change. Goodbye everyone.  

Thank goodness Eric was here to cheer me up:

The future of America is pretty bright, even if it doesn’t seem that way right now. That being said, we absolutely need to safeguard our assets if we want to flourish throughout the 21st century. Demographically, we are in one of the better positions among developed countries. Looking at a Population Pyramid, the U.S. is in an excellent position now and toward 2050, especially compared to Europe, Russia, and East Asia. Where this could go wrong is if we Millennials don’t have children and we stop becoming one of the top destination choices for emigrants. As long as we prioritize high wages and economic growth, we will remain an attractive place for immigrants (and especially if we change existing policy to make it easier for highly skilled immigrants to come here). And if we keep our demographics from collapsing, we will continue to be the center of innovation in the world, and the strongest developed economy. With the investments made now in renewable energy and the continuing investments in energy storage, the U.S. has a good chance of remaining the world leader in energy production. Where this could go wrong is if we regulate ourselves out of mining necessary minerals and new energy projects. I predict that as more people view climate change as a threat, the activist push for the government to prevent renewable energy-related projects on environmental grounds will start to dissipate. Over the last century humans have shown amazing ingenuity in completely changing the world, and with more and more people getting educated and encouraged to innovate, I don’t see any reason why that would change. And as a lot of people are more aware of marginalized parts of our society and there is agreement on getting resources to those parts of society, we will continue to unleash all of our talent to solve our problems. The only thing that can stand in the way of this is ourselves!

About the Author

More Stories

How Colleges Should Address Anti-Semitism

Seven Questions That Should Be Easy for Harris to Answer

• PREDICTIONS

This is what life will be in 2050

School education in 2050

Luckily there was a big revolution at school. Children still meet in classes, but rather to be together with 30 other children, now just 5-6 pupils are organized and paired with one adviser for assisting. 50% of the learning takes place in schools, the other 50% take place outside the school to face reality as soon as possible and to experience all subjects.

Learning on your device at home is also possible. There is no need to be physically present at school as long as you are connected to your group. But still: most kids prefer to meet in reality.

There is no grading at school anymore, the achievements are measured with the solutions you find for all the problems you are confronted with. Real world problems, not educational-fictional problems. 7-year-olds invent universal communicational images, 17-year-olds tackle chemical reaction patterns to find ecological materials.

Transport in 2050

Building new infrastructures in exciting and crowded cities is always the biggest issue: Modern infrastructure uses tunnels for long distance connections. Some levels are used for human transportation, the very deep levels are used for goods transportation. The first underwater tubes for intercontinental travelling are in preparation.

To reduce traffic on streets, private transportation was forbidden years ago: today’s vehicles (still with wheels) are self-driving cars which are all public used. Most people use an electric scooter for short distance travelling.  And some people still walk by using their own feet. Surgical operations in 2050. 

Medicine in 2050

Surgeries, of course, will be performed by robot arms for ultra-precise movement, even able to remove and isolate tiny groups of a few cancer cells behind your ear.  The robot arms decisions are 100% ki driven (Key Identification) and each action relies on a worldwide health database. Where doctors may perform a few 1000 surgeries for each case in their whole life, this ki-driven health network has seen millions and millions of surgeries and can compare for the perfect treatment.

Every baby born in the year 2050 will have a storage for stem cells from the umbilical cord blood. The technology of tissue engineering makes it possible to create any type of body cells from the stem cells to recreate any organ. 

Related predictions

Delete comment?

More From Forbes

2050 unveiled: a glimpse into the future.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

The future has always been an uncharted territory, but now, more than ever.

The future has always been an uncharted territory, but now, more than ever, there is a collective urgency to understand what lies ahead.

The choices we make today, both as individuals and as a global society, will undoubtedly shape the course of tomorrow.

Speculating about the future is not merely an exercise in forecasting; it is a vital tool for envisioning the possibilities that await us. The act of peering into the future allows us to explore potential scenarios and prepare for the challenges and opportunities that may arise. It serves as a compass, guiding us in making informed decisions to impact the world positively.

As we stand at the precipice of unprecedented technological AI advancements, environmental concerns, and societal transformations, the need to proactively shape our shared destiny becomes increasingly apparent.

Through informed speculation, we can identify areas where intervention is crucial, imagine innovative solutions, and collaboratively work towards a future that is sustainable, equitable, and harmonious.

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of September 2023

Best 5% interest savings accounts of september 2023.

This is an invitation to engage in shaping a better world for generations to come.

Technological Integration: By 2050, technology will likely be seamlessly integrated into everyday life. Augmented reality, virtual reality, and artificial intelligence will be commonplace, transforming how we work, learn, and interact.

Sustainable Living: The urgency of climate change will drive a global shift toward sustainable living. Renewable energy sources, eco-friendly technologies, and circular economies will be the norm, with cities designed for minimal environmental impact.

Space Exploration and Colonization: Human presence in space could be more established. Space tourism will become a reality, allowing many more civilians to experience the wonders of the cosmos.

Healthcare Revolution: Advances in tele-health and medical technology may lead to personalized medicine, genetic therapies, and breakthroughs in disease prevention. Nanobots and wearable devices will monitor and enhance our mental and psychical health continuously.

Artificial Intelligence in Governance: Governments will leverage artificial intelligence for efficient public services, decision-making, and policy implementation. Smart cities with interconnected systems will enhance urban planning and resource management.

Cybersecurity Challenges: As technology advances, so will the sophistication of cyber threats. Ensuring robust cybersecurity skills and measures will be critical to protect sensitive data and prevent large-scale disruptions.

Biotechnology Transformations: Breakthroughs in biotechnology will lead to massive extended human lifespans, bioengineered organs, and new frontiers in addressing genetic diseases. Ethical considerations surrounding genetic modification will be significant.

Global Connectivity: Hyperconnectivity will facilitate instantaneous communication and collaboration on a global scale.

Work and Education Evolution: Traditional work structures and educational systems will evolve. Remote work and online education could become more prevalent, offering flexibility but also raising questions about workforce dynamics and social interaction.

Mind-Computer Interfaces: Brain-machine interfaces may enable direct communication between the human brain and computers, revolutionizing how we access information and interact with technology and people around us.

The biggest surprises of 2050 might lie in the unexpected ways humanity adapts and innovates in response to the challenges and opportunities of the time.

How do you envision 2050?

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Join The Conversation

One Community. Many Voices. Create a free account to share your thoughts. 

Forbes Community Guidelines

Our community is about connecting people through open and thoughtful conversations. We want our readers to share their views and exchange ideas and facts in a safe space.

In order to do so, please follow the posting rules in our site's  Terms of Service.   We've summarized some of those key rules below. Simply put, keep it civil.

Your post will be rejected if we notice that it seems to contain:

• False or intentionally out-of-context or misleading information
• Insults, profanity, incoherent, obscene or inflammatory language or threats of any kind
• Attacks on the identity of other commenters or the article's author
• Content that otherwise violates our site's  terms.

User accounts will be blocked if we notice or believe that users are engaged in:

• Continuous attempts to re-post comments that have been previously moderated/rejected
• Racist, sexist, homophobic or other discriminatory comments
• Attempts or tactics that put the site security at risk
• Actions that otherwise violate our site's  terms.

So, how can you be a power user?

• Stay on topic and share your insights
• Feel free to be clear and thoughtful to get your point across
• ‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ to show your point of view.
• Protect your community.
• Use the report tool to alert us when someone breaks the rules.

Thanks for reading our community guidelines. Please read the full list of posting rules found in our site's  Terms of Service.

TED is supported by ads and partners 00:00

What will the world be like in 2050?

• global issues

• EssayBasics.com
• Pay For Essay
• Write My Essay
• Homework Writing Help
• Essay Editing Service
• Thesis Writing Help
• Write My College Essay
• Do My Essay
• Term Paper Writing Service
• Coursework Writing Service
• Write My Research Paper
• Assignment Writing Help
• Essay Writing Help
• Call Now! (USA) Login Order now
• EssayBasics.com Call Now! (USA) Order now
• Writing Guides

Life In The Future (2050) (Essay Sample)

Table of Contents

Introduction

How far into the future have you gone in your daydreaming or reflections? I recently took the time to think about what life in the future may look like.

For this essay, I asked myself, “What will life be like in 2050?” 2050 seems far away but with modern technology, economic development, scientific advances, and climate change, we will find ourselves in that day and age soon.

Want to write about life in the year 2050? You can read the essays below for your guidance. If you need extra help, think about availing our affordable essay writing services .

What will life be like in 2050 essay

The 2000s came with innovations in many fields and sectors across the world. Most notably, the Internet kicked in and revolutionized the world, connecting people globally and creating an international village of Internet citizens.

Social media took it further by establishing a platform where you could manage your network of relationships.

From 2010, more new inventions were introduced to the global population, and the trend seems to be continuing at a steady rate. Life ahead seems to hold more surprises.

This paper aims to outline possible future scenarios of what life may look like after the next few decades, specifically by 2050.

Heading into the 21st century

Space explorations.

The 21st century brought to the fore more technology-oriented inventions than ever before.

While the 20th century saw man land on the moon, the 21st century will witness man visit several of the many planets that dot the universe.

The first to be explored will be Mars, also called the Red Planet. The mission is likely to be accomplished by 2030, as planned by NASA. This will write a new chapter in history and set a precedent for future explorations by subsequent human generations.

Discovering the cure for AIDS

Moreover, increased investment in research activities is likely to pave the way for the discovery of a vaccine for Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS).

Increased acceptance of the LGBTQ+ community

Sex and gender issues are another aspect that will change by 2050.

Homosexuality has become a familiar topic of conversation in the current generation. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) issues are slowly being talked about and recognized amid heated debates among more conservative groups.

By 2050, they are likely to be such a universally accepted community that the law will require employers across the world to set aside a percentage of their employment vacancies for LGBT candidates. Such a mandate will be implemented alongside the existing gender-based directive of the equal female-and-male employee ratio.

The digitization of media

Media technology continues to rapidly evolve. At present, social media is taking the lead in relaying quick news bits and community engagement. Without question, it poses a threat to traditional sources of media including television, newspapers, radios, and magazines.

By 2025, some traditional media sources, specifically print newspapers, will have a diminished readership as online news sites and social media will have penetrated their share of readership.

The rise of e-commerce and e-cars

Mobile phones will play a greater role in retail shopping and financial transactions. Electronic money will replace paper money.

Additionally, with declining oil reserves across the world, electric cars will step in for petrol cars in the next few decades. Consequently, there will be a major shift in job trends, as some roles will be taken over by AI or will no longer be relevant.

The ever-changing face of US politics

The United States made history in 2016 by electing a president with no prior experience in politics. The electorate is breaking away from the traditional mentality of choosing experienced politicians with track records.

To say that a female president will be elected into office after President Donald Trump’s era is not shallow speculation. By 2050, the U.S. will have tasted female leadership.

Also, if Trump’s anti-immigration policy and deportation of illegal immigrants get adequate support in subsequent leaderships, the United States may have stunted population growth and few cases of immigration. These kinds of policies will impact America’s role as a global influencer.

Global warming continues to be a problem

Finally, global warming will become an even bigger problem. We will continue to see a rise in sea levels. At the same time, pollution will damage our freshwater sources.

From another perspective, dictatorships, chiefly in Asia, will destabilize the world. North Korea, China, and other emerging nuclear-armed countries will become major security threats to the entire world.

While such countries may trigger increased regional wars, World War 3 will not occur. In addition to this, terrorist groups will dominate major regions of the world.

With many changes up ahead – good and bad – in the coming decades, it would be good to prepare and anticipate how it will personally affect us.

Life In The Future 2050 Short Essay

In this day and age where we live in a developed world, it would be so easy to let our imaginations run wild when we think of what society would look like in the year 2050.

Nowadays, the technological advances we’ve made in almost every industry show incredible progress. Virtual reality is shaping the world of gaming, as well as e-learning and employee onboarding. Artificial intelligence is helping us run our households. Solar energy is being featured in many progressive homes and structures.

What about if we fast-forward to 2050? We may see a completely different list of developing countries as we continue to witness technology changing the lives of the global population. Self-driving cars may be a common occurrence as we seek to find ways to promote safer roads. More environmentally-friendly products and services will be used in homes and offices as we become more aware of the effects of climate change. Finally, robots may change the face of manufacturing. Manual labor may no longer be needed, which will result in tremendous job losses.

These are just a few of many life-altering changes that we could see happening in the coming years.

How to Write an Essay About The Future

A good way to envision the future is to daydream. When we describe something that hasn’t happened yet, we largely utilize our imagination. As such, we need to take time to sit down and think about our image of the future.  Ask yourself all sorts of questions that will stimulate your imagination. Will we be able to finally contact other planets? How will genetic engineering cause demographic changes? Are we going to care more deeply about renewable resources? What will the state of the ozone layer be given our current trend? After asking yourself all these questions, the next step is to do some actual research. Look for credible sites and authors that focus on forecasting and predicting. See how they line up with your speculations. Choose the trends that most accurately align with each other.

Will Life Be Better In The Future?

It depends on what you mean by “better.” Are driverless cars really the best way to ensure road safety? Will young people truly benefit from the progress we make as a society? Will technology really bring people together? In other words, will these revolutionary changes really be for a more connected and happy society or simply a matter of convenience? It is hard to answer this question definitively. We don’t know if life will be better for every member of the global population in 2050, but we know that it will certainly be different for everyone.

Browse Content

Who do we answer to, how does a good life feel.

• What is the role of suffering in a good life?

What is a life worth living?

Explore all resources, featured content.

Al-Ghazali on Trusting God's Benevolence

By Life Worth Living Team

John Stuart Mill on Utilitarianism & Pleasure

A Life Shaped by Utilitarianism

By Julia Wise

Life Worth Living is an initiative of the Yale Center for Faith & Culture at Yale Divinity School .

HST 21008 | Life Worth Living (Univ of Sheffield)

Personal vision of a life worth living—summative essay: assignment 3.

By Joshua Forstenzer

Joshua Forstenzer & Casey Strine

This essay discusses your normative commitments. It is a first person discourse, a discussion of what you think, believe, and feel about what makes for a life worth living.

By Joshua Forstenzer & Casey Strine

The summative assessment for this module is a single essay of up to 1,000 words outlining your personal vision of a life worth living in dialogue with at least two of the traditions studied in the module. The aim of this essay is for you to outline the normative ideas and commitments that are central to your current vision of a flourishing life in conversation with aspects of the traditions across history that we have explored in this module.

This essay discusses your normative commitments. It is a first person discourse, a discussion of what you think, believe, and feel about what makes for a life worth living. This essay is not just a description of the historical context from where a tradition came from—though it should include some material to that effect. Neither is it merely a description of key ideas from a tradition, though it should definitely include discussion of those ideas as well. It is not even only a critical analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of a tradition, or why it might be found satisfactory or unsatisfactory by someone, though this sort of analysis will be not merely relevant, but certainly part of an accomplished essay. You should not simply explain what you think are the limitations of Nietzsche’s ideas, for instance explaining why his attitude to moral metamorphosis is a product of its historical circumstances and not entirely adequate to yours. You could however, outline how the idea of the eternal return has helped clarify your own position, offering your critique of its content and then discussing why you have adopted a different approach in your vision of a flourishing life.

This is an academic essay, so it will require you to engage with primary and secondary literature and to reference it appropriately. The aim is for you to locate your ideas in the longue durée of discussion on the topic. Where your ideas resemble traditions we have studied—even if they have not derived directly from them—indicate those connections, citing specific texts that highlight them. Where your ideas constitute a refutation of important views we have studied, make this clear too. And, if you have chosen to adopt part of one of the traditions covered this term, explain why and point to the socio-historical context, primary texts, and secondary source discussions of both that have been instrumental in you reaching this conclusion.

The essay should also indicate your capability to apply the various analytical concepts we will develop in the module. Recall these guiding questions:

• To whom or what are we responsible for living our lives a certain way?
• What is a human being and what is their place in the world?
• What does it mean for life: a) to feel good (affective), b) to go well (circumstantial), c) to be led well (agential)?
• What should we do when we fail to live a good life?

The best essays will not only be able to articulate the personal vision, and to locate it within the longue durée , but also to employ these analytical questions and critical concepts to define their content.

Life Worth Living

HST 21008 The University of Sheffield Taught by Joshua Forstenzer & Casey Strine

Life Worth Living Newsletter Signup

Sign up for updates and access the entire library of previous Life Worth Living downloads.

Keep browsing

Join the LWL Community

We’ll send you a monthly email with our latest content.

Branded Newsletter Sign Up

We’ll send you a weekly email with our latest content.

• Bliv medlem

Du er ikke logget ind

Alle bøger

• Danske bøger
• Engelske bøger
• Studiebøger
• Brugte bøger
• Sælg dine brugte bøger
• Giv et gavekort

Skønlitteratur

• Børn og unge
• Fantasy og science fiction
• Klassisk skønlitteratur
• Krimi og spænding
• Romantik og erotik
• Tegneserier og graphic novels

Faglitteratur

• Erhverv og ledelse
• Mad og drikke
• Rejser og ferier
• Sundhed, krop og sind
• Økonomi og finans

Alle e-bøger

• Danske e-bøger
• Engelske e-bøger
• Kom i gang med e-bøger
• Download til din Kindle
• Science fiction

Alle lydbøger

• Danske lydbøger
• Engelske lydbøger
• Kom i gang med lydbøger
• Populære oplæsere

Alle medlemskaber

• Saxo Premium
• Saxo Streaming
• Saxo Shopping
• Gå på opdagelse
• Serieguides
• Populære genrer
• Giv bøger i gave
• Sådan læser vi
• Nye bøger
• Kommende bøger
• Bøger, du skal læse
• Turen går til
• Saxos streamingbibliotek
• Nyheder i Saxos app
• Top 10 i streaming
• Populære bogserier

Børnebøger

• Bøger til 0-2-årige
• Bøger til 3-5-årige
• Bøger til 6-10-årige
• Bestsellere
• Kundeservice

Life 2050 - Unser Leben in der Zukunft. Life is a Story - story.one

- seidel, n: life 2050 - unser leben in der zukunft. life is a.

• Nick Sebastian Seidel
• Bog, hardback
• Leveringstid: 2-3 uger Forventet levering: 07-10-2024
• Kan pakkes ind og sendes som gave

Beskrivelse

Life 2050 - Unser Leben in der ZukunftWillkommen im Jahr 2050! Tauche ein in eine Welt, in der technologische Innovationen und gesellschaftliche Veränderungen unseren Alltag revolutioniert haben.Entdecke, wie Künstliche Intelligenz unser Leben erleichtert und autonome Systeme den Alltag gestalten. Erfahre, wie die Live-to-Earn Ökonomie mit Kryptowährungen neue wirtschaftliche Möglichkeiten bietet und jede unserer Aktivitäten belohnt.Erlebe, wie Fortschritte im 3D-Druck und in der Drohnentechnologie maßgeschneiderte Produkte auf Wunsch erstellen und direkt zu uns nach Hause bringen. Von individuell gestalteten Möbeln bis hin zu personalisierten Alltagsgegenständen.Life 2050 - Unser Leben in der Zukunft bietet einen faszinierenden Blick auf eine Zukunft, in der Technologie und menschliche Kreativität Hand in Hand gehen, um eine bessere und aufregendere Welt zu schaffen. Erleben wir gemeinsam, wie diese Zukunft voller Innovation, Abenteuer und unendlicher Möglichkeiten aussieht.

• Udgivelsesdato 02-09-2024
• ISBN13 9783711552785
• Forlag story.one publishing
• Format Hardback
• Vægt 200 g
• Dybde 0,9 cm