Climate change and population


#1

At the recent climate change talks in Copenhagen, population stabilisation or reduction was not part of the agenda. The whole focus of the conference was on technology. The conference concentrated on how to make technology more effective and efficient in relation to reducing or eliminating carbon emissions. This only addresses part of the formula known as IPAT, which is used to measure air pollution. According to IPAT, environmental impact = population x affluence x technology. Of the components that make up this formula, population and technology impacts can be reduced, while affluence is impossible to reduce because reducing it has too many negative externalities. The technology to reduce carbon emissions to sustainable levels largely is yet to be invented. Therefore should programmes that are designed to stabilise or reduce global population to better reflect ecological carrying capacity levels have been on the agenda of the conference?

Population x Individual consumption = Collective environmental impact
For example 6 x 6 = 36 is still less than 18 x 3 = 54.

IPAT means “environmental impact (I) = population level § X per capita consumption rate (A) X technology (T).”

http://www.bangordailynews.com/detail/141708.html


#2

Should the UK Government have a Minister for Population? The UK is already the most densely populated nation in Europe. The Australian Government after a painful public debate that has continued intermittently for 18 months, and was strongly associated with the Prime Minister being replaced by his own party after commencing the debate in a speech that advocated a big Australia, has created a Minister for Sustainable Population and is conducting a public inquiry into the matter.

http://www.newstatesman.com/environment/2011/04/human-population-essay-food


#3

In future Britain should consider importing solar energy from abroad, according to a new report from the Committee on Climate Change.
Read this article.