I don't have access to this paper, but perhaps Geoffrey Poole could tell us more about the methodology and assump;tions behind the paper. I ask this because I have seen some misleading studies based on simplistic assumptions which I consider deceptive. For example, it is often assumed that the ecological footprint of one person is the ecological footprint of the country divided by the population, but this is not the marginal impact of adding one person. The environmental cost of producing material for export is not proportional to population, for example.
It is certainly true that the US uses far more than its share of global resources, and it seems almost cavalier to point out that not all the ecologists on this list live in the US. In any case, the idea that people who are aware of the declining environmental state of the world should stop having children and leave reproduction to those who feel that natural resources are unlimited seems a bit odd to me. Bill Silvert Portugal ----- Original Message ----- From: "Geoffrey Poole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 2:16 AM Subject: Environmental consequences of having a child >A thought provoking reference regarding the environmental effects of > having a child: > > A SPECIAL SECTION FOR CORRESPONDENCE AND CONTROVERSY - THE ENVIRONMENTAL > CONSEQUENCES OF HAVING A BABY IN THE UNITED-STATES > Author(s): HALL CAS, PONTIUS RG, COLEMAN L, KO JY > Source: POPULATION AND ENVIRONMENT 15 (6): 505-524 JUL 1994 > > Abstract: This paper gives crude estimates of the environmental > consequences associated with the birth of one baby in the United States. > We calculate the magnitude of one hundred environmental impacts which > one American born today will cause over a lifetime. The impacts are > grouped under five headings: waste generation, mineral consumption, > energy consumption, ecosystem alteration, and food consumption. We also > consider, but do not quantify, impacts on extinctions of species and > indigenous cultures. Our purpose is to emphasize the role of population > growth in the creation of environmental problems, and to make potential > parents aware of their ability to impact the global environment. We > conclude that one especially effective way for individuals to protect > the national and global environment, and hence protect the wellbeing of > all existing people, is to stop creating more humans. > > --------------- > > I am not against people having (up to two) children. I have a > 2-year-old daughter myself. But let's not underestimate the > "environmental footprint" of a baby born in the U.S. > > -Geoff Poole > >
