mhaze,

I am saying just the opposite, that there is no reason that people shouldn't be criticised for behaving irresponsibly simply because they are black or brown. The people of Barbados (black) and Costa Rica (Latino) are behaving responsibly and not having more children than they can decently provide for, so why can't the rest of them? Not everything is the fault of the West.

Divergence,

Oh I see. You're assuming that Zero Population Growth is desirable and that anyone who doesn't buy that is "behaving responsibly". Very open-minded of you.

FYG I don't mind how many kids they have. Its their call....no matter how much melanin they have. The facts are that, as societies become wealthier their fertility rate declines. All first world countries are below replacement.

So the best way to encourage these people to do what you consider the responsible thing is to all them to accumulate wealth. Imposing your opinions on them is, shall we say, somewhat imperialistic.

Since this thread is about the ways to reduce our emission, decrying their life-style choices seems rather crass. They are living a life that emits very little CO2 which is one reason they see the need to have more kids. Perhaps we should take their lead and reduce our per capita emissions by having lots more kids.

m haze, Simply put, the opposition to nuclear power was driven by and paid for throughout the West by the Communist Soviet Union when they realised that their economy could never compete against Western industries driven by the cheap electricity that was capable of coming from the nuclear power stations. This opposition was based on poor science and over reactions and it has become so solidly embedded in the public mind that it will take years (generations) to defuse.
The climate change facade is one way of destroying affordable and reliable power systems.
Now the left is driving a strong anti-achievement sentiment along the lines that it creating social division between the haves and have not's.

Jay Cee Ess,
Perhaps we should do an experiment & ask the Leftists to live in caves for a year. The outcome would be truly astonishing, especially to them.

individual, the trouble is that the Leftist who so strongly espouse the sacrifice of so many "luxuries" that capitalism and the free market have made affordable to all of us, would never go on their own but force everyone into their darkness. Notice the over 200,000 electricity consumers throughout Victoria that suddenly lost their power on Friday. That took all levels of society and of all political persuasions into the dark. (Fortunately nearly all of Melbourne voted red in their recent State election, but they will probably accept it as it would've hurt those on above average incomes who had installed their own air conditioning the most. And those capitalist shop keepers forced to close and lose money.)
By the way, the dominant print media in Queensland has kept that mass blackout out of sight. If not for the ABC, it would not have been known to many north of the Border.

mhaze,

You are correct that making people in high fertility countries better off would bring fertility rates down, but this is extremely difficult to do if a population is doubling every 25 or 30 years. The resources that could be used for development have to be diverted to meeting the basic needs of more and more people. I don't see these people as helpless victims of the evil white man; I see them as lunatics beating their heads against a brick wall. If they stayed at home, they would have to wear the consequences, but a lot of them want to emigrate at any cost and consume like us, as we can see from those drownings in the Mediterranean.

http://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/71b6/e0119df7070088f82a35a8f8cefb9284e4b7.pdf

It is clear from the graph that I linked to above that cutting consumption alone would not be sufficient to solve our environmental problems. China is now the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, not the US, and it would still be the biggest even if you exclude production for export. This is not because the average Chinese is living high on the hog. If all the resources were divided equally we would all be poor right now, let alone when we have 11 billion people, as the UN medium projection shows.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/12/want-to-fight-climate-change-have-fewer-children

We in the developed world are already having fewer children, but we are more than compensating by taking in huge numbers of migrants. Unless the migrants are already rich or come from other rich countries, they will have a much bigger environmental footprint when they move to a developed country.

http://www.swinburne.edu.au/news/latest-news/2018/11/chinese-migrants-follow-australians-giant-ecological-footprints.php

I will believe that the Left are serious about global warming and the environment when they encourage nuclear power and genetically engineered food, get over population denial, and oppose more than zero net immigration.