September 10, 2007

What to do about global warming

As you may have noticed, I don't write much about global warming. It's a complex subject that would take me a long time to master and I don't see much evidence that I would contribute anything novel and important if I ever did.

That said, I do have a suggestion for a straightforward way to lessen future harm caused by global warming that I haven't seen mentioned elsewhere:

Bring down the birthrate in Bangladesh, fast.

The logic is this:

If global warming is happening severely enough to partially melt polar ice caps and thus raise sea levels, the most severely impacted country would likely be Bangladesh, which topographically resembles the Mississippi Delta that took such a hit from Katrina in 2005: low-lying land vulnerable to big storms off the ocean. The current population of Bangladesh is 150 million and the total fertility rate is 3.09 babies per woman. The U.S. Census Bureau forecasts that the population of Bangladesh will almost double between now and 2050, when it will reach 280 million, assuming half of them aren't washed out to see in a big cyclone.

My published articles are archived at -- Steve Sailer


James said...

Washed out to sea... or relocated to Minneapolis.

Anonymous said...

The birth rate in Bangladesh is already plummeting. Dredge and fill will be more than enough and with aquaculture could bring us very cheap shrimp.

Col. Reb Sez said...

I love your blog, but the Mississippi Delta begins in the lobby of the Peabody Hotel in Memphis and ends in Catfish Row in Vicksburg. Other than a day or two without power and a few downed trees, the Mississippi Delta didn't take much of a hit from Katrina.

The Mississippi GULF COAST, on the other hand.....

Anonymous said...

The birth rate in Bangladesh is already plummeting.

Is it? Tell us more.

Anonymous said...

There are two other ways the U.S. could reduce its projected future output without any reduction in material standard of living.

1) Establish a moratorium on immigration for a 30-40 year period.

2) Eliminate the deduction for more than two dependents on the income taxes.

Both of these would have positive benefit to the U.S. society even if global warming is hokam.

Anonymous said...

Kurt 9: Why would discouraging kids here (the effect of eliminating the deduction past 2 kids) make anything better w.r.t global warming? The overwhelming majority of whatever scientists and engineers develop the technology to deal with future climate change will be kids of first world middle-class parents. Decreasing the number of those kids will not be a win for dealing with global warming, nor for anything else.