💾 Archived View for gmi.noulin.net › mobileNews › 1357.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 08:07:42. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-12-05)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
2009-08-05 04:51:43
For people who are looking for ways to reduce their "carbon footprint," here's
one radical idea that could have a big long-term impact, some scientists say:
Have fewer kids.
A study by statisticians at Oregon State University concluded that in the
United States, the carbon legacy and greenhouse gas impact of an extra child is
almost 20 times more important than some of the other environment-friendly
practices people might employ during their entire lives - things like driving a
high mileage car, recycling, or using energy-efficient appliances and light
bulbs.
"In discussions about climate change, we tend to focus on the carbon emissions
of an individual over his or her lifetime," said study team member Paul
Murtaugh. "Those are important issues and it's essential that they should be
considered. But an added challenge facing us is continuing population growth
and increasing global consumption of resources."
Reproductive choices haven't gained as much attention in the consideration of
human impact to the Earth, Murtaugh said. When an individual produces a child -
and that child potentially produces more descendants in the future - the effect
on the environment can be many times the impact produced by a person during
their lifetime.
A child's impact
Under current conditions in the United States, for instance, each child
ultimately adds about 9,441 metric tons of carbon dioxide to the carbon legacy
of an average parent - about 5.7 times the lifetime emissions for which, on
average, a person is responsible.
The impact doesn't only come through increased emissions of carbon dioxide and
other greenhouse gases - larger populations also generate more waste and tax
water supplies.
Other offbeat environmental impacts have been in the news recently:
once shared resources such as energy now use twice as much under two roofs.
production is a major contributor to global warming.
The impact of having children differs between countries. While some developing
nations have much higher populations and rates of population growth than the
United States, their overall impact on the global carbon equation is often
reduced by shorter life spans and less consumption. The long-term impact of a
child born to a family in China is less than one-fifth the impact of a child
born in the United States, the study found.
However, as the developing world increases both its population and consumption
levels, this equation may even out.
"China and India right now are steadily increasing their carbon emissions and
industrial development, and other developing nations may also continue to
increase as they seek higher standards of living," Murtaugh said.
Not advocating law
The researchers note that they are not advocating government controls or
intervention on population issues, but say they simply want to make people
aware of the environmental consequences of their reproductive choices.
"Many people are unaware of the power of exponential population growth,"
Murtaugh said. "Future growth amplifies the consequences of people's
reproductive choices today, the same way that compound interest amplifies a
bank balance."
Murtaugh's findings are detailed in a 2009 issue of the journal Global
Environmental Change.