[Vision2020] Is Anthropogenic Climate Warming Caused by Over-Population?

[Ted Moffett]

Art Deco wrote:


>  As far as I'm concerned, the earth has plenty of resources but there are
> just too many people using them and using them unwisely which contributes in
> part to global warming.  I see no solution to this whole over-population,
> over-consumption problem in the near future, but only that it will get worse
> and with it, barring some unforeseen natural events, some very life changing
> changes.
>
> But all this is speculation based on currently asserted probabilities by a
> very large portion of the relevant scientific community.  Our knowledge and
> understanding in this area is far from comprehensive at this point, and as
> with any knowledge claims, subject to correction based on further
> observations.
>
> W.
>

It is an interesting question whether anthropogenic global warming can be
linked to over-population.  I think the data is very clear that unless
global "over-population" is defined with a very, very low population count,
global warming is mostly not now due to over-population.  Much of the
current world population is not to a great degree causing global warming via
fossil fuel sourced CO2 emissions.  And a global population
of approximately 1.5 billion (only 22 percent of current world
population), consuming fossil fuels in the manner of current US per capita
rates, would result in approximately the same level of current global
atmospheric CO2 emissions from fossil fuels.  I offer sources to support
this claim below.

Anthropogenic global warming is due primarily to an extreme level of *per
capita* CO2 emissions from fossil fuel burning, mostly from a small fraction
of the world's population in a small number of developed industrial
nations.  Thus any realistic attempt to address global warming via
population control is futile, without lowering this extreme per capita CO2
emissions rate, that threatens to expand CO2 emissions dramatically as a
fossil fuel intensive economy and lifestyle is more widely adopted in the
future, even if the number of people adopting this lifestyle and
economy remains only a fraction of total global population.

The facts regarding CO2 emissions globally, nationally and per capita for
each nation need to be considered.

Total global population is now approximately 6,805,624,842, according to
this source:
http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/popclockworld.html
----------
US current population is 308,777,466 according to this source:
http://www.census.gov/population/www/popclockus.html
---------
According to the source below, US per capita emissions in 2006 were 19.78
tons.  It is amazing that everyone in the US on average is responsible
annually for that many tons of CO2 in the atmosphere, though there are other
nations of lower population (none of higher population) that per capita
exceed US emission rates, as the data at the website below indicates
(Australia at 20.58 tons per person).  Also, note China's total emissions
now are annually (not total historical CO2 or per capita emissions) the most
of any nation:

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/each-countrys-share-of-co2.html
--------------
The US percentage of total global CO2 emissions in 2006 was 19.8 percent,
according to the Earth Policy Institute at website below.  Note this is an
annual figure, not total historical CO2 emissions by nation as a percentage,
for which the US is far and away the number one source of emissions among
nations:

http://www.earth-policy.org/index.php?/indicators/C52/
--------------------
The US is more responsible for the current percentage of human sourced CO2
in our atmosphere, given CO2 atmospheric lifespan, than any other nation,
despite China's current annual emission rates exceeding the US annual rate,
given the data presented by The Guardian at the website below. However, I
recently learned (from the book "Storms of My Grandchildren" by NASA climate
scientist James Hansen) that the United Kingdom has the *per capita* number
one historical CO2 emissions total by nation:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/datablog/2009/sep/02/co2-emissions-historical
-----------------------
Let's assume global population at 1.5 billion, with these 1.5 billion people
engaging in the per capita fossil fuel consumption and CO2 emission rates of
the US from 2006 given above, amounting to 19.8 percent of total 2006 global
emissions.  With US population at approximately 300 million, 1.5 billion is
five times US population, so the total emissions of this total global
population of 1.5 billion would be approximately 99 percent of the 2006
global total CO2 emissions.

A total global population of only 1.5 billion, engaging in the US pattern of
fossil fuel use in 2006, would still be inducing anthropogenic climate
change due to increasing atmospheric CO2 levels.

Therefore, given the impacts on Earth's climate of the US economy per
capita, expanded to total global population, over-population, to
avoid anthropogenic climate change from fossil fuel sourced emissions, would
need to be defined at a figure below one billion total global population.

------------------------------------------
Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20100228/032c5a00/attachment.html