Contraception would be cheaper action against global warming, says study
This article was translated by an automatic translation system, and was therefore not reviewed by people.
British research says that would cost a fifth of the estimated transition to green energy.
Birth control would be the cheapest way to reduce carbon emissions in the future - requiring almost one fifth of the costs of transition to a green technology - according to the report fewer Emitters, Lower Emissions, Less Cost ( "Under Issuers, lower emissions, lower cost, "in free translation), London School of Economics.
The study was commissioned by the British non-governmental Optimum Population Trust (OPT), which advocates the gradual reduction and stabilization of world population and should be distributed to delegations attending the meeting of the United Nations (UN) climate from 7 to 18 December in Copenhagen.
"There are 10 thousand new carbon emitters per hour, 1.5 million per day, 80 million a year '
The chairman of OPT, Roger Martin, told the BBC Brazil that the findings justify the inclusion of the issue of birth control in the UN discussions on climate change. Currently, the subject did not even enter the agenda of negotiations.
"The issue of population is circulating for some time. All (negotiators) are aware, at breakfast, behind the scenes, it is impossible to have a radical reduction in carbon emissions accompanied by a dramatic increase in the number of issuers," said .
'Tabu irrational'
For the former British diplomat, one of the founders of the NGO that he still figures such as Richard Attenborough naturalist and scientist James Lovelock, among others, the subject just is not discussed because it is officially taboo.
According to the UN, about 40% of pregnancies are unwanted in the world
"For reasons of taboo totally irrational, it is never mentioned, never addressed and therefore, there are 10 thousand new carbon emitters per hour, 1.5 million per day, 80 million per year."
Martin acknowledges that the largest emitters are the inhabitants of rich countries that "have to reduce their consumption per capita, but says that both rich and poor must tackle head on the population problem.
The document is an analysis of cost-benefit of investments in contraceptive methods to encourage family planning. According to the UN, about 40% of pregnancies are unwanted in the world.
From this assumption, the study of OPT calculates that by 2050, 34 gigatons (billion tons) of emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) would be issued on the planet, equivalent to nearly six years of current emissions of the United States and 60 years of UK emissions.
Price per tonne
In the cost analysis, it was concluded that every $ 7 invested in birth control in the next 40 years, would reduce global CO2 emissions by more than one tonne.
Every $ 7 invested in birth control in the next 40 years would reduce global emissions of CO2 by more than one tonne
It compares this value to the price calculated by a recent study by McKinsey on the cost of transition to a so-called low-carbon economy, ie, based on renewable energy, low emission, estimated at $ 32 per tonne (in 2020).
In these calculations come all costs to implement sustainable sources like wind turbines, solar panels, geothermal, electric and hybrid cars, installing equipment to capture and storage (CCS, its acronym in English) on coal-fired power and biofuels.
Since the calculation of the OPT study considers only the investment needed to meet the unmet demand of about 200 million women who become an unwanted round.
The report cites a UN survey, which states that if these women had access to contraception, the number of births in the world would fall 72%, which would reduce the expectations of the world population in 2050 to half a billion people.
With this, highlights the OPT would be experienced 12 billion of "person-years" (consumption of a person for a year) at least reducing the estimate of current projections of 338 billion to 326 billion person-years.
Source: BBC
This article was translated by an automatic translation system, and was therefore not reviewed by people.
Important:
The JurisWay site does not interfere in the work provided by doctrine, why only reflect the opinions, ideas and concepts of their authors.
