Welcome !
You've earned Points
According to a report authored by FAIR’s Director of Special Projects Jack Martin entitled Immigration, Energy, and the Environment, Americans actually achieved more than a nine percent reduction in per capita energy consumption between 1973 and 2007. During that same time period, however, the U.S. population increased nearly 70 percent, with more than 31 percent of that increase directly attributable to legal immigration alone. In addition, the report notes that “the share of population growth attributable to immigration is still higher when illegal immigration and the children born to the immigrants after their arrival are included.” This population increase led to a 33 percent increase in American energy consumption from 1973 to 2007 — an increase that can be attributed primarily to U.S. population growth over that period.
With Congress and the Obama Administration considering an energy bill, wouldn’t it make sense for them to take into account the single largest contributing factor to greenhouse gas emissions over the past 35 years? Unfortunately, this hasn’t been the case. The House of Representatives recently passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, legislation more commonly referred to as “Cap-and-Trade.” The bill seeks to, among other things, “cap and reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” a move that supporters of the legislation suggest would help fight global climate change. However, the bill fails to address the principle cause of the problem it is seeking to solve: immigration generated population growth.
According to Immigration, Energy, and the Environment, “Any effort by the United States to reduce greenhouse gas emissions must take population growth into account.” The report goes on to point out that the central component of an energy policy that deals with population growth “must include an effective and enforceable immigration policy that curbs immigration levels to the point that it is no longer driving U.S. population growth.”
The report is available in its entirety here.
Kurt_Thialfad, 3 years ago | FlagHere in California
, one plan is to assign a 'carbon footprint' to various appliances and objects. A refrigerat or has so much of a carbon footprint; an automobile ; a bicycle, etc But nobody thought to assign a 'carbon footprint' to a single California n. If you track the increase in greenhouse gases over the decades, it tracks perfectly to the increase in population . Has anybody bothered to notice whether there is any corelation ? A bear utilized 10 acres of forest, and when he dies, he is replaced by only one bear. Humans have learned to use technology
to save time (use of fire; cooking food, etc) and supported a higher population density. But historical ly, we always seem to outpace out technology advances, and the herd needs to be culled either by mother nature though disease or famine or by our own suicidal hand through war. Isn't it about time we use our brains to better manage our population
growth?
Former Member , 3 years ago | FlagApril 05MY 3/16/07 Letter to Nancy Pelosi, At Her Request
GLOBAL WARMING= OVERPOPULATIONLet's face it, switching to driving foreign hybrids in America or switching to flourescent lightbulbs or even recycling more, etc., is just a phony facade. We must reduce population on earth and with our high per capita energy use in America; we must drastically reduce population in industrialized nations, like America ASAP. We have no choice, if we're going to reduce CO2 emissions.
How can we reduce global warming in America and add 100,000,000 immigrants in a couple decades? The simple answer is we can't, without depopulation in America now. We must have a comprehensive immigration plan that freezes our country's growth, does not allow amnesty/guest worker increases and pays for massive global planned parenthood clinics throughout the earth.
The Baby Boomer generation in America should be given environmental KUDOs by the Democrats and the Republicans for depopulation as a generation and keeping their birthrate down to reduce America's population now the last few decades for this group's part. The Baby Boomers set the birthrate standards that all the new immigrant ethnic groups in America should adhere to, to reduce global warming.
Demographers all say America was overfull in 1970 at 200,000,000 people and now we're horrifingly over-full at 300,000,000 people. The Orcas whale is going extinct from massive dead spots in Puget Sound and heavy metals throughout our country are causing exponential growth in Autism. These are only two examples of America's environmental deterioration from its current overpopulation, as the list is currently horrifyingly endless.
Its time to immediately put the American Baby Boomers generation on a an immediate pedestal, as the clone example for the rest of the world to follow in depopulation, for reducing global warming.
We must halt immigration into America to the level of 200,000 per year (that's how many immigrate out of America per year), until we depopulate back down below 200,000,000; or we'll never solve our industrialized nation's larger share of the world's global warming!
We don't need more Americans, we need much less to tackle global warming ASAP. We have no other choice that will work!The rest of the URL:
Flagging notifies the FAIRDebate webmaster of inappropriate content. Please flag any messages that violate the Terms of Service. Please include a short explanation why you're flagging this message. Thank you!
If you believe this content violates the Terms of Service, please write a short description why. Thank you.
Flagging notifies the FAIRDebate webmaster of inappropriate content. Please flag any messages that violate the Terms of Service. Please include a short explanation why you're flagging this message. Thank you!
Your First Name (optional)
Email Addresses (comma separated)
Import friends
Message to Friends (optional)
Are you human?
Or, you can forward this blog with your own email application.
