Heat pumps and electric cars can’t save a world with too many people, says Fleet Street Fox
When Boris Johnson takes the main stage at the COP26 summit on Sunday, he will set out all the ways he is personally fighting climate change.
It will keep going faster via hydrogen boilers, heat pumps, electric charging stations, CO2 targets, and no doubt it will spend a lot of hot air on why a hippie’s instant glue on the street has a bigger carbon footprint than a yeti in a coal mine.
But he won’t mention one of the biggest causes of climate change in space – his own selfish desire to create 7 miniature versions of himself in a world already overpopulated with Johnsons.
The main characteristic of the family gene seems to be a self-esteem in inverse proportion to its real worth, which has obviously worked wonders for them, but without other accomplishments it may be less of an asset to humanity as a whole.
Any child living now can eat less meat than their parents, but they will need more waiters. They may rely more on solar energy, but expect more microchips, robots, health care, and water. In the case of the Johnsons, they might need political power to survive and then we’ll all be screwed.
As a man who complains that he doesn’t have enough money to live on, you might think that after two divorces, four children, and a paternity battle for a fifth, even the last two weren’t extravagant – he, nor we, could afford it . If he was from Burnley rather than Bullingdon, and more perks than the international stage, you can bet your lower dollar on it Daily welly graph Columnists would demand its sterilization.
Then there are those who can afford to feed their children and see no reason not to have more of them. Cristiano Ronaldo and his partner Georgina Rodriguez have announced that they are expecting twins – bringing his total to 6 and theirs to 3.
Maybe one grows up trying to find a cure for brain cancer and maybe we just get 6 more people expecting private jets and constant international travel. “Our hearts are full of love,” said the parents-to-be. “Your houses are full of nannies,” we others may think.
Instagram / Christ)
Anyone who proposes a sensible number of children regulation should take a look at China and the economic and social damage of arbitrary legislation for demographic change with a one-child policy. People make mistakes, they get carried away with passion, and some of them can’t count to 28 that well. Twins almost always come as a surprise, contraception is fallible, and vasectomies have been known to be reversible.
But the connection between population growth and climate change is undisputed. In the 20th century, the number of people more than tripled – from 1.6 billion to 6.1 billion. At the same time, carbon dioxide emissions grew by a factor of 12. Every new person not only consumes but also emits more greenhouse gases than their parents.
So if you can’t legislate to reduce the population and we want to continue medical advancement that protects us from disease and premature death, then there is only one option left.
We need to make large families as unacceptable as drink-driving. And that will never happen while people treat children like a status symbol.
In Central England, having four children is a sign of the comfort of the middle class. In sub-Saharan Africa it is a sign of patriarchal power. In America it is an article of religious belief, while under kings it is a guarantee that your family can keep what they shouldn’t have.
Not so long ago it was more normal. My own grandmother was the last of 6 children, their mother the last of 8. But they had no television or birth control, and besides, the babies did not all grow up.
For some, having multiple children was a form of cheap labor to run the farm. Perhaps that still applies to Yorkshire Shepherdess Amanda Owen and husband Clive, whose 9 children are arguably one of the main reasons the public is fascinated with their lives, which has resulted in 5 books and 3 TV series to bolster the razor-thin profits of sheep farming .
On the other hand, the family income would have to be replenished less if there were less of it. And since Clive already had two children when they began their breeding program, he is officially more fertile than Henry II.
However, these people are increasingly becoming outliers. Official data show that 1996 Britain had 7.3 million families. Of these, 41% had one child, 41% had two and 17% of them, or 1.2 million people had three or more children.
By 2020 the number of families had grown to 8 million, but more of them had fewer offspring. Almost 43% of families have only one child, just under 42% keep two and the number with three or more has fallen to 15%.
Other things have changed too – there are now 16,000 same-sex families with children, an increase of 100,000 single parents, and the number of cohabiting partners has more than doubled. Despite what Tories keep telling us, these parents seem to be more thoughtful than the “traditional” strain as they are less likely to have 3 or more offspring.
Whether it is because of more education, better careers for women, or rising costs and house prices so that money is not stretched into additional sprogs, people in the UK are having fewer children. But just barely: the average number of children rose from 2.42 in 1996 to 2.39 in 2020.
But for the world rankings that will be at COP 26, the average is 3.
AFP via Getty Images)
15 prime ministers and presidents travel to Glasgow. Together they have 45 children – and Boris Johnson at 7 is second only to the fertility of Nigerian Mohammadu Buhari, who has 10.
The Ghanaian President Nana Akufo-Addo has 5 points, while Joe Biden, Israel’s Naftali Bennett and the Turk Tayyip Erdogan take 4th place with 4 each. Justin Trudeau from Canada and Ivan Duque from Colombia both have 3 children while only two leaders – Mario Draghi from Italy and Scott Morrison from Australia – kept it at a decent 2. Alberto Fernandez from Argentina made a very reasonable 1.
Obviously, success in politics is linked to Willy-Winking. The only woman on the list, Nicola Sturgeon, has no children, which may explain why it is no longer on the list.
This male-led summit has a male argument over who is to blame and who should pay. If it were led by women, they might be more aware that childbirth diminishes the importance of penises than the opposite.
Imagine if COP 26 had a presenter who was aware of being on the stage and telling the world, “Scotland is underwater right now because people thought the future of mankind depended on breeding not from thinking. Mother earth has too many children. It’s time to tie a knot, for the sake of all of us. “
You have to imagine that, because what is walk will happen is father of 7 Boris Johnson will tell everyone else they litter the house and then do big balls like Johnny for fixing it.
If only he could get on higher ground.