Connect

NPG president Don Mann asks how it is possible for our policy makers to continue to ignore the elephant in the room: the impact of U.S. population size and growth on our greenhouse gas emissions and national energy consumption. For more information view a recent New York Times article titled Hard Task for New Team On Energy and Climate, The New York Times, dated December 16, 2008.

In less than two decades, our U.S. population, driven by mass immigration, has grown from 249 million in 1990 to 305 million today, a tremendous increase of 56 million, or 22 percent.

Our annual per capita emissions of greenhouse gases, and our per capita consumption of energy (including oil) have remained fairly constant for the last several decades. It follows that, from 1990 to today, our greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption have increased by 22 percent as the direct result of our population growth.

But whether our greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption are constant, growing or diminishing, is irrelevant to the fact that because of our population growth, our greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption today are 22% greater than they would have been if our population had stopped growing in 1990.

Our U.S. population is projected to reach 420 million by mid-century. That would be 171 million more than our population of 249 million in 1990, or an increase of 69 percent!!

The result would be that, regardless of the level of our per capita emissions and energy consumption at mid-century, our total emissions and energy consumption would be an amazing 69 percent greater than they would have been if our population had stopped growing in 1990!

(Incidentally, if we mindlessly allow our population to grow by some 171 million in six decades, 1990 to 2050, that increase alone would be greater than the present populations of all but six countries in the entire world of almost 200 nations.)

The task that we are faced with, to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption to a sustainable level, is mind boggling in its dimensions. To give but one example: in order to maintain the present concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere at even the present level of 383 ppm (which must eventually be lowered significantly) annual emissions would need to be reduced by an astonishing 70 percent!

It is completely irresponsible for our policy makers to perpetuate the illusion that such a goal could possibly be achieved unless we first halt and then eventually reverse our population growth. We at NPG believe that, after an interim period of gradual negative growth, we should stabilize our U.S. population at not more than 150 million, about its size in the 1940’s.

A concluding note about problem solving in general. It is axiomatic that the essential first step in problem solving is to properly define the problem. That it because the definition of the problem, to a great extent, dictates the proferred solutions. The best way to define a given problem is to begin by asking relevant questions.

I suggest that, with regard to the overwhelming problem of our greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption, it is indispensable for our policy makers to ask themselves the following questions:

1. Does the size and growth of our U.S. population have an impact on our greenhouse gas emissions, and our energy consumption?

2. If so, can that impact be measured?

3. If it can be measured, and that impact is found to be substantial, is there anything that could, or should, be done to reduce it?