There is a definite connection between global warming and world population size.
Heated Debate in Kyoto: Population overlooked as a cause of Global Warming
Heated Debate in Kyoto:
Population Growth Overlooked as a Cause of Rises in Greenhouse Gases
by Joy Fishel, ZPG Research Assistant
Daybreak: December 11, 1997, Kyoto, Japan–the day after the talks on a global warming treaty were supposed to end. The heat has been turned off, and the translators’ contracts have expired. After nearly 72 straight hours of negotiations, exhausted delegates nap in chairs and on the floor of the Kyoto International Conference Center as negotiators hammer out the final details of what is now known as the “Kyoto Protocol.”
A historic milestone passed as 159 nations signed on to the first-ever international agreement setting legally binding limits to greenhouse gas emissions. According to Jonathan Lash, president of the World Resources Institute, “If countries who sign the treaty put in place the requisite policies and actions, the world will be set on a new course, one which is less dependent on fossil fuels, less polluting and less a threat to human health.” The Kyoto Protocol, however, is only a conservative beginning to this new course.
The treaty requires that industrialized nations reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by an average of 5.2 percent below 1990 levels by 2012. But it would take at least a 60 percent reduction to stabilize at current levels the concentration of gases that have been collecting in the atmosphere since the mid-1800’s.(1) Alden Meyer, Director of Government Relations for the Union of Concerned Scientists and a ZPG board member, calls the Kyoto Protocol a “minimal first step.” “Now,” he adds, “the challenge is to move quickly to implement the reductions, and to begin discussing deeper cuts for the next phase after 2012.” [Treaty Box]
Points of Contention
Gridlock between the United States and the European Union characterized most of the conference until Vice President Gore arrived to give a speech in which he announced that he had advised the U.S. delegation “to show increased negotiating flexibility.” The United States came to the climate conference with a proposal to set emissions reduction targets at 1990 levels and no lower, while the European Union wanted to reduce emissions to 15 percent below 1990 levels. Under a compromise agreement, the treaty calls for the E.U. to reduce emissions to 8 percent below 1990 levels, the U.S. to reduce them to 7 percent and Japan to reduce them to 6 percent below 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012.
While the industrialized nations comprise only 20 percent of the world’s population, to date they have released into the atmosphere 90 percent of all global carbon emissions from human sources. Each year, developed countries continue to release two-thirds of all global emissions. Furthermore, in a world where economies are driven by fossil fuel consumption, the developing countries, with 80 percent of the world’s population, make up only $5 trillion of the $23 trillion global GDP.
Even if, hypothetically, the less-developed nations produced no greenhouse gas emissions, the amounts of gases emitted by the industrialized world alone would still pose a significant threat to the Earth’s future climate. Because of these circumstances, the industrialized nations agreed to make the first commitments to greenhouse gas cuts in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change signed at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992.
During the December talks developing countries repeatedly refused to make any commitment to set even voluntary emissions reductions targets before the industrialized nations started their reductions program. Nor, according to Kyoto conference guidelines established at the 1995 Second Conference of Parties, were they required to.
Industrialized countries have an obligation to make the first steps. However, developing countries share an obligation to follow suit, even though they worry that emission caps will jeopardize their burgeoning economies. Due to the rapidly increasing size of the populations and economies of countries like China, India and Mexico, greenhouse gas emissions from developing countries will soon pose a significant threat to global climate.
Developing countries also objected to the proposal for “emissions trading,” saying it would allow rich countries to buy their way out of making real reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Under a system of emissions trading, countries that more than meet their reduction targets could sell their emission “credits” to countries that fail to meet their targets. The United States claims that this system will encourage reductions of global emissions where they are most cost-effective.
According to the present agreement, trading can only occur between industrialized countries since they are the only ones subject to emissions targets. Developing countries can participate in another program included in the treaty called the “clean development mechanism” which allows industrialized countries to receive credits towards their emissions targets by investing in upgrades to more energy-efficient technologies in other countries.
Population Growth a Factor for U.S.
Population growth adds to the amount of greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere in many ways. More people in the world, especially in countries which have a high standard of living (such as the U.S.), means more cars on the road and more electricity, heat and air conditioning in homes and businesses. It also means increased deforestation and increased agricultural and industrial production. Each of these activities requires the burning of fossil fuels and/or increases the emissions of gases like carbon dioxide, methane, and hydroflourocarbons (HFCs). Most scientists now agree that the increased concentration of these gases in the atmosphere has a significant and potentially dangerous impact on the Earth’s climate.
In the United States, carbon emissions are expected to be about 13 percent higher in 2000 than they were in 1990.(2) According to United Nations’ projections, the U.S. population will increase by 9.3 percent over this same period. As Frederick Meyer of the Yale School of Forestry noted, population growth alone accounts for more than two-thirds of the increase in carbon emissions this decade. In other words, if the United States wanted its 2000 emissions to be no higher than they were in 1990, it would have to reduce carbon emissions per capita by almost ten percent just to make up for the increase in population.(3)
With respect to the Kyoto Protocol, the United States’ high rate of population growth relative to other industrialized countries will make reaching its emissions targets more difficult. Under the treaty, between 2008 and 2012, the United States is required to reduce is emissions to 7 percent below those of 1990. According to the expected increase in population by 2010, the United States would have to decrease its emissions per capita by 22 percent below 1990 per capita emission levels (which, by the way, are themselves substantially lower than present per capita emission levels) in order to comply with the treaty.
In contrast, Japan, which is slated for a 6 percent reduction below 1990 emissions, will have to make only a nine percent reduction in per capita emissions from 1990 levels due to its slower rate of population growth.
Despite the obvious impact of population growth rate on emission levels, population was not discussed directly in the Kyoto negotiations. The next round of climate talks, scheduled for November 1998 in Buenos Aires, Argentina, is expected to include further debates on the emissions reduction commitments of less developed countries. Since the populations of less developed countries are increasing at a much faster rate than those of the industrialized countries, population issues should play an even more central role in the dialogue. But will population issues