A new study predicts population will drop sharply as developing economies grow.

You won’t hear this from the professional climate alarmists, but an important study on global demographics has good news for the future of greenhouse emissions. For some time, demographers have been scaling back forecasts of future population growth, but they may not have gone far enough. A new University of Washington studypublished in the Lancet argues that conventional population statistics don’t account for ongoing and projected future improvements in health care and education for women around the world. More literacy and better access to information about contraception are, along with urbanization, associated with declining fertility rates as women gain better control of their reproductive lives.

Looking at the impact of these forces, the study predicts some startling changes over the course of the century. Instead of the global population reaching between 9.4 billion and 12.7 billion by 2100 (as estimated in the 2019 United Nations World Population Prospects report), the new study suggests it will peak at 9.7 billion in 2064 and then decrease to about 8.8 billion by 2100. If the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goals for education and contraceptive use are met in full, the researchers estimate that population could be as low as 6.29 billion in 2100. That would be 33% lower than the lowest current U.N. projection, and around 1.5 billion fewer than the Earth’s population today.

Even under the less aggressive scenario, the consequences would be far-reaching. China, where the University of Washington study expects population to decline by 48% to 732 million, would fall to third place, behind India and Nigeria, in the world population ranking. Population in 23 countries and territories, including Japan, South Korea, Italy, Portugal and Spain, would fall by 50% or more from their peaks. America, where continuing immigration is expected to offset declining fertility, would slip from third to fourth place with 336 million, barely more than today.

These shifts would lead to wrenching change. Health-care and pension systems would come under great stress around the world as shrinking numbers of working people support large populations of older people. But the impact on greenhouse emissions would be much more benign.

These projections may not pan out; 80 years is a long time horizon and predicting the reproductive choices of people not yet born is less science than art. Nevertheless, the study points to a vital linkage between climate and progress that the green movement often overlooks. Growth can be good. Economic development brings better health care and more information to women around the world.

There are several lessons here for policy makers wrestling with the difficult issues surrounding climate change. The first is that conventional strategies for combating climate change are too narrowly conceived. A focused global effort to ensure that the education and contraceptive SDG targets are fully met could have a significantly greater long-term impact on emissions than more-expensive and unpopular policy choices like carbon taxes or the mandated use of expensive renewables.

Reproduction isn’t the only human behavior that changes with greater wealth and more education. Societies that are wealthy enough to provide education and health care also act to preserve and restore their natural surroundings. Developing countries may hack down their forests, pollute their rivers, and foul their air, but when they become rich they invest in repairing the damage and reducing their footprint.

Full post ($)

The post Walter Russell Mead: Snooze The Climate Alarms appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

https://ift.tt/32YBpDX

July 28, 2020 at 08:09AM

America’s Frontline Doctors traveled to Washington and gave a press conference.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/335cs9Q

July 28, 2020 at 08:09AM

For Peter Ridd, it would have been so much easier if he had gone quietly. This battle is not for him, but for our Australian Universities. He shouldn’t need to take this to the High Court, or even the Federal Court. The Scott Morrison government could turn off the tap to every institution which won’t guarantee free speech and enshrine it in their employee declarations. Dan Tehan is reviewing the university model code, but they don’t need a review. They know, we know, everyone knows, without free speech our universities are just Big Government advertising agencies. Those funds could be frozen tonight, and watch how fast the universities can rewrite their contracts. At the speed of light…

From John Spooner, The Australian.

Peter Ridd Seeks High Court Appeal

Charlie Peel, The Australian

Sacked James Cook University professor Peter Ridd will go to the High Court over his controversial sacking for publicly criticising the institution and his colleagues over their climate change science.

A week after the Federal Circuit Court overturned an earlier court decision awarding him $1.2m, the marine physicist has confirmed the next front in his legal battle that has already cost more than $1m. Professor Ridd, […]

via JoNova

https://ift.tt/3hFMRsf

July 28, 2020 at 08:07AM

By Paul Homewood

h/t AC Osborn

An electric road system which could see a network of overhead charging cables along the UK’s major road network ‘would almost completely decarbonise UK road freight’, a report has found.

The plan, which would cost an estimated £19.3billion, would see National Grid powered catenary cables charge 65 per cent of the nation’s lorries using an extendable rig known as a pantograph- similar to those used on an electric train.

The proposal, which has the potential to pay for itself within 15 years, is believed to be ‘technically viable, economically attractive and could be achieved by the late 2030s’, according to the report by The Centre for Sustainable Road Freight.  

According to the report, the cables would link to lorries driving on the inside lanes on 7,000km of the UK’s roads and quickly and cost-effectively decarbonise HGVs.

The overhead cables, which are often used on trains, supply the positive and negative electrical circuit that is picked up through a pantograph collector sitting on the roof of the HGV.

The electricity transmitted along the active pantograph would power the lorry’s electric motor and recharge an onboard electric battery, enabling the vehicles to travel to destinations outside of their electric zones.

The pantograph can be easily connected to and disconnected from the contact wire either automatically or manually at the push of a button.    

The HGV vehicle can then move away from the wires to overtake or complete its journey. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8563909/New-19-billion-e-highway-network-overhead-cables-electric-lorries.html

As most of the comments in the Mail have pointed out, why waste £19bn, just to cut emissions by a tiny 5%?

Claimed savings are at best dubious. What allowance, for instance, has been made for upgrading distribution networks?

Then there are the problems of going off the main trunk routes, In theory, lorries will switch to battery power, but how long will that last? And what about European freight?

And then there is the question of where all of this electricity would come from.

The report comes from the Centre for Sustainable Road Freight, and personally I would not trust anything from any body with “Sustainable” in the name. They claim that the economics are so good that it should easily attract private finance. I’ll believe that when I see it!

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

https://ift.tt/2COhQUi

July 28, 2020 at 06:48AM