1a.

The persistent pollution shown in blue is so low in this scenario because the initial non
renewable resources started very low. There is a lack of resources when compared to the
carrying capacity. There were less nonrenewable resources such as coal and fossil fuels to
burn, thus resulting in lower persistent pollution rates.

1b. The population peaks at the year 2006. It is so early because of the sharp decline in
resources and the leveling off of persistent pollution.

1c. The land fertility drops dramatically low because of the decline in potentially arable land. As
the curve levels off, the land is able to recover.

2a. I used initial nonrenewable resources of 400000000000 and changed only the year in which
the policy become effective. I saw that the population peaked in 2006, declined, and then
leveled off at 2.50e^11. Nonrenewable resources declines, just like the previous model.
Persistent pollution also stays low, and the land fertility, also is very similar.

2b. One thing that might be useful is if we could know what this data would have looked like if
an environmental policy had been put into place much earlier. This information is useful
because we could use this model to see what would happen if we did not put a policy into effect;
that the environment will just continue to be more polluted and unsustainable.

3. I chose to set the initial nonrenewable resources to 2556053811660 for both scenarios, and
tested the years 2020 and 2101. One scenario to represent the present and one scenario of the
near future. This information could show the policy makers what the results will be if we do not
put a policy into place now, how our world will look like when we do not take any action.

Table1: Results of Scenarios using World3 Model

Initial Resource / Sketch of Results Sketch of Results -
Year of Overview Demographics
Policy Adoption
400000000000/
2015

400000000000/
1970

2556053811660/
2020

2556053811660/
2101