Population Growth is the Problem

...so says Vernon resident Charles Wills.

Here's his letter to the editor of the Morning Star, printed December 11, 2019:

"In response to letters from Robert T. Rock of Mission City and Terry Dyck of Vernon, I wold like to say that I agree that an increasing amount of global warming is anthropogenic and that we should be doing everything we can to slow this man-induced warming.  Also, I agree that there are significant economic opportunities developing in the field of alternative energy solutions.

"...that tax dollars are not employed efficiently

 -- a kind of social friction."

However, my experience through having worked for the government with road construction and maintenance crews in the field, and then on design in government engineering offices during my seven years attending university, is that tax dollars are not employed efficiently -- a kind of social friction.

"...a losing proposition

 in terms of stimulating an economy..."

To have government suck money out of the economy by way of carbon taxes, subsidization of alternate energy projects etc. is a losing proposition in terms of stimulating an economy in an effort to solve what I agree is a significant global warming problem.

 "...there are 7.7 billion people on our planet,

 growing at a rate of over 70 million per year,

 more than double Canada's population..."

What I find mind-boggling is the fact that there are 7.7 billion people on our planet, growing at a rate of over 70 million per year, more than double Canada's population, which is only about 0.45 per cent of total world population.

(Click graphic to enlarge:)

No one is suggesting how we either control population growth or prevent about six billion people with a current relatively low carbon footprint from significantly increasing their carbon footprint in an effort to achieve a standard of living close to that of the developed world.

It seems to me the greater problem is population growth.

It also seems to me that we should be doing everything we can to "economically" control our toxic degradation of our environment and, yes, reduce our carbon footprint.

However, our efforts are a drop in the bucket compared to the affect(sic) of warming generated by billions of others on planet earth.

 "...by planting new

 chlorophyll generating flora northward

 as our arctic regions warm."

Our efforts would be better employed by preparing Canada for the affects(sic) of climate change, by limiting our own population growth, by planting new chlorophyll generating flora northward as our arctic regions warm.

My experience with hydroponic greenhouse growing of vegetables is that increased CO2 concentrations (via burning natural gas without venting, inside) increases the rate of growth of the plants.

I'm certain that the same thing occurs in nature, that is, that the increased CO2 concentration in the atmosphere increases the growth of the chlorophyll flora, thus increasing the conversion of CO2 to carbon fibre and O2 (oxygen).  Incidentally, CO2 is not toxic, we exhale it with every breath.

In its effort to plan and direct a more efficient economy, governments worldwide have taxed and borrowed to spend our countries into an unrepayable debt situation which is about to initiate a major economic correction, which in turn will negate our ability to deal with climate change, no matter how many carbon credits Al Gore sells -- an inconvenient truth."

Charles Wills, Vernon



There's no argument from Canadians that tax dollars aren't employed efficiently!