Despite having strong feelings on the subject I’ve not written about climate change that often. Five posts in nine months is not really all that many for what is, essentially, a “soapbox” blog where I voice my opinions on a variety of subjects and you read intently because you know I’m always right. My opinions are as good as facts. Heck, they’re better than facts.
Far be it for me to toot my own horn, of course. Were it not for the lavish praise you willingly heap upon me I would be far too modest and humble to say such things. Yet over the last nine months you have all grown to realise that you can count on me. Where our education system has failed you, Textual Relations will not.
It is in this continuing spirit of public service that I bring you my latest lesson. Andy over at Political Friends is a good friend of Textual Relations and it was while reading his blog (which I highly recommend) that I came across the news that women in the UK are being sterilised to battle global warming. Some global warming activists have argued that large families are bad for the environment. Are they right?
Well, in the simplistic terms put forward by those who harp on about fossil fuels, yes. If we’re supposed to be cutting down our C02 output because it’s so evil then surely the solution is to have less children? Since the Industrial Revolution, the event that global warming activists consider to be as evil as the holocaust the world’s population has gone up from well under 2 billion to over 6 billion.
Yet could you not equally make a case that larger families are better for the environment? We’re told car-pooling is good. Surely, then, a family of 6 or 8 travelling in a single car is brilliant? When they use a washing machine they’ll wash eight people’s clothes instead of one. Large families bring with them economies of scale, both economically and environmentally. So is the answer to have more children?
The answer is no. All these hypothetical scenarios do is highlight the embryonic state climate science is in and yet we’re told “ACT NOW!” Not that I’m suggesting for one second that it’s wrong to act, not at all. Wherever possible we should seek to lessen our impact on the environment, there’s simply no reason not to. CFLs not only save the environment but they save money, give better light and last longer.
Recycling is usually quick and easy. For example it used to be a nightmare getting rid of newspapers when I threw them away, now I recycle them it’s much easier. Not only is it convenient though, it’s doing my part for the environment. Walking instead of driving for short journeys is another example. This not only helps the environment but crucially improves your health. You can burn a small meal’s worth of calories with just an hour of walking a day. Crucially about 55% of this is in the form of fat! Walk more, drive less.
Sensible solutions abound. Even if you don’t believe in man-made global warming these things bring benefits besides the environmental ones. Sensible solutions to the rising C02 caused by an increasing population include things like planting window boxes or more plants in your garden. Don’t worry about the size of your family, make like bunnies and you can still do your part by planting a nice garden which you can enjoy.
Of course things like that don’t make great media stories. No, instead let’s attack oil companies and big business, let’s demand that government impose stricter emissions standards. Forget that in the time since the birth of industry the world’s population has tripled. Unlike global warming population growth is a problem that we can actually pinpoint the causes of and solve. The consequences of an exploding population are real, unlike climate change, the effects of which are entirely unclear.
Amongst the backdrop of the scaremongering of the climate change activists I fear the very real problem will be missed until it’s too late. We’ll be so distracted by greenhouse gases and fossil fuels and lose sight of the population explosion until it’s too late. Then a slogan like “Save The Planet: Have An Abortion!”, which seems funny now, will be scarily real. What a political minefield that would be, climate change meets abortion.