Why does the global warming debate almost never include discussion on overpopulation?

Question

Or any possible solutions for it?

Answer 1

Global warming is far easier to control than the population.

In a nutshell we're running at 970% capacity in terms of the greenhouse gas emissions that nature can handle. To reduce GHG emissions to a sustainable level through a policy of population control would mean killing off 90% of the world's population.

Every individual on the planet contributes to global warming, even if all they do is breathe, some contribute much more than others. The average American contributes 1980 times as much as the average Chadian (excluding breathing). To minimise the cull it would make sense to kill off the worst offenders first - goodbye developed world, hello third world.

Whilst (over) popluation is a problem, controlling it isn't really a viable solution. If we did reduce the population significantly, it would mean greater resources available to those that remained and inevitably utilisation of those resources would increase, negating much of the effect acheived through population reduction in the first place.

Then of course there's the legistics, legalities, implementation, moral and ethical dilemas, economic impact etc.

Answer 2

My theory is because the idea of being fruitful and multiplying is still so ingrained in so many people's brains that the idea that the fruits of their loins are just nothing but consumption machines is still very offensive to most people. It is true that the birthrate is falling in most industrialized nations and that 3rd world nations who breed like no tomorrow do not factor into the equation as much as your typical American nuclear family. But what most people fail to realize is that even though the replacement rate is indeed 2.1, we are living much longer than ever before. Let us say you have a couple who has 2 children. Those two children have two children a piece, and now those 4 children have two children a piece. It is not terribly uncommon to have 4 generations alive at once, so we started out with that one couple, and now there are an additional 14 people sucking up resources. That's why I think the replacement rate is nonsense.
But the light a the end of the tunnel, I suppose, is the earth always finds way to keep its populations in check. Of course there is the ongoing drought, famine, and disease in Africa. I also think there will be some sort of plague that our medicines will not help, that will affect the whole world, including the ever so impervious (sarcasm) industrialized nations of the world.

Answer 3

I don't know for sure but maybe it is because cutting the population in half would only slow global warming by half, and such a drastic population cut is clearly out of the question. But finding other energy sources that do not produce CO2 will allow the present or even larger population to live without causing global warming.

Answer 4

I don't know whether or not overpopulation is an issue at all, but assuming that it is an issue, I'd say it would be an issue which is not easily and humanely dealt with. For example, governments can regulate pollution and fuel economy, but most governments don't practice population control. Can you imagine if America tried to pass the one-child only rule?

I don't know if China still has their rules, last I heard they did. But of course there are still population problems there due to the fact that people abandon their baby girls so that they can have a successful son. Not to mention the inhumanity of the abandoned children. So, population control is not a popular issue to talk about.

Answer 5

"Global warming", as over-hyped by the evo-freaks, does NOT exist. And the world is not overpopulated either. There are NO 'cures' or 'solutions' to either because neither is a real factual problem.
A small unimportant problem is the small populations of peoples who choose to live in naturally dangerous areas where nothing can be grown with any success.

Answer 6

Because people are too hung up on Al Gore and misinformation and lack of information or too much information ...

Population is the issue no one ever seems to want to talk about, not the way we need to as a planet, because there are too many "special interest" groups who pout and stomp when you do. Elections are lost on such issues. It's a real hot potato.

Answer 7

Because people are being mislead into thinking that global warming is going to continue. If people saw a study of what would happen to civilization based on the outcome of a 2C drop in mean temperature over the next twenty years, they would be freaking out.

Answer 8

Is the world overpopulated? Lots of people seem to think so, but I haven't seen anything quantitative regarding food supply vs population, fuel supply vs population, drinking water vs population, etc. It seems that we have bunches of neo-Malthusians wandering the coutnryside worrying about what may not be a real problem.

Overpopulation is addressed, but indirectly. The projections by the IPCC model a number of CO2 emissions schemes. These schemes indirectly account for population growth, using CO2 changes as a proxy for economic and population growth.

Even if I were to accept the premise that overpopulation is a problem now, what are the demographic trends for the next 100 years? Will population increase or will it level off or will it decline on its own?

Answer 9

overpopulation??
there is only 7 billion or less people on this world
there is enough land area to give every man women and child their own 5 acre plot

Answer 10

One thing at a time. One thing at a time. Let us first take care of our carbon footprints, especially in the top carbon emmitting countries like US. Let us all live a better lifestyle and reduce our usage of petrol and oil. Then we can take care of our other problems in good time. Everything done in good time.