You are here

Lima Climate Talks were, as always, in Population Growth Denial

The Principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities: Origins and Scope For the World Summit on Sustainable Development 2002 Johannesburg, 26 August, was intended to provide a basis for international cooperation and has apparently been an issue of contention at the 2014 Climate Talks in Lima 12 years later. (See explanatory document here: Legal brief on 'Principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities'.)

During the 12 days of talks World Population grew by approximately 2.7 million people. I wonder whether those 2.7 million will create any carbon emissions during their lifetimes? In the 12 years since the Principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities was drafted, World Population has grown by approximately 860 million people. The Principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities makes no mention of population growth, yet this is the one issue that has the potential to bridge the divide between extreme population growth in the developing world and extreme emissions in the developed world.

The talks concluded after 12 days on 12 December 2014.

It is quite clear that:

  • The developing world has a responsibility for urgently ending its destructive contribution to global population growth
  • The developed world has a responsibility for urgently ending its own population growth, supporting stabilisation of developing world populations and transitioning to zero net carbon emissions; and also has a responsibility for ending its ridiculous reliance on population growth to drive what it calls "Economic Growth"
  • The entire world must accept that economic growth fuelled by population growth is an absurd and self destructive strategy that will end either by deliberate planning or by catastrophe, and that this population crisis must be addressed without further delay.

There is a common cause here and by denying the existence of the Population Growth Problem the Climate Talks in Lima, as always, have made a mockery of reality and stand as testimony to an unofficial and globally orchestrated policy of environmental destruction and human rights abuse in the name of Economic Growth.

A, if not the, primary force driving Economic Growth for over 100 years has been Population Growth. The more People, the more Emissions, the more Money. Why is this issue omitted from "Climate Talks"?

The answer seems relatively simple. No Government is prepared to recognise that its beloved Economic Growth is primarily driven by Population Growth, which in turn drives Human Rights Abuse, Emission Growth and all other forms of Global Environmental Destruction.

Think of the human race as a hierarchy of haves and have nots. Most of global net population growth is happening amongst the world's poor. If 2.7 million extra souls are added every 12 days the majority are have nots. It is the 2.7 million added to the "bottom end" every 12 days that are the greatest human rights concern. They are also the greatest Emissions Management concern because there is no justification in denying them access to the advantages of fossil fuel.

I'll say it again:
"A problem well stated is a problem half solved" Charles Kettering.

Comments

Trying to mitigate anthropogenic climate change and reduce emissions against a background of huge increases in global population means that efforts to produce alternative sources of energy must continually outstrip population growth! At least if we could stabilize our population, there's a chance that the challenge can be measured, and a program of greenhouse gas emissions can be scheduled and planned within a framework, but while population numbers are exploding - even while the conference at Lima was taking place- means that the problem is getting bigger and with no terms of reference!

These climate change summits mount to almost nothing but a theatre because there is no mention of population growth. How can nations "reduce emissions" while the use of fossil fuel energy remains the main source to a growing number of people (consumers and emitters)?

Tony Abbott remains aloof about committing to climate change because our GHG emissions are largely exported, through coal and gas mining, and through meat exports. At the same time, our Ponzi model of "economic growth" requires a constant import of people, to add to the scheme of artificially inflating our GDP - while we continue to get poorer each generation. Additionally, land clearing continues to release carbon into the atmosphere, and Australia must remain a Pariah and denier in these negotiations.