Population and Climate ChangeA “Malthusian” theory about the relationship between population growth and the environment suggests that as populations grow, they will strip their resources leading to famine, hunger and environmental degradation.As detailed further in this site’s section on population, that is an oversimplification and has largely shown not to be true. Instead, it has been factors such as politics and economics (i.e. how we use our resources and for what purpose) that has determined environmental degradation or sustainability.For example, the world’s wealthiest 20% (i.e. the rich countries) consume approximately 80% of the world’s resources, while the rest of humanity shares the other 20% of resource consumed, as noted in the consumption section of this web site.In regards to climate change, countries with large populations such as China and India have not been the countries contributing greenhouse gases for the decades that has been required to trigger climate change, as noted further above.While in total amounts their emissions might be high (China is second largest emitter after the United States, for example), per person, their emissions are significantly smaller as noted earlier.
bmoran on 28 May 07On the political side of global warming, nearly all Democrats realize that global warming is, in fact, a real problem while their counterpart Republicans deny this reality. According to the article, "In the United States, a February 2007 survey found that 95% of the 41 Congressional Democrats surveyed agreed 'it's been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the Earth is warming because of man-made problems' while only 13% of the 31 Republicans surveyed agreed." And, although the U.S. has not ratified the Kyoto Protocol, 195 U.S. cities have pledged to reduce carbon emissions.
