Children 'bad for planet'

Article from The Australian
By Sarah-Kate Templeton

May 07, 2007 12:00am

HAVING large families should be frowned upon as an environmental misdemeanour in the same way as frequent long-haul flights, driving a big car and failing to reuse plastic bags, says a report to be published today by a green think tank.

The paper by the Optimum Population Trust will say that if couples had two children instead of three they could cut their family's carbon dioxide output by the equivalent of 620 return flights a year between London and New York.

John Guillebaud, co-chairman of OPT and emeritus professor of family planning at University College London, said: "The effect on the planet of having one child less is an order of magnitude greater than all these other things we might do, such as switching off lights.
"The greatest thing anyone in Britain could do to help the future of the planet would be to have one less child."

Read the rest of the story
here. And the press release from OPT here.


Devona said...

As one of Olivia's children's book says, "What awful tommy-rot."

Anonymous said...

You know, most large families I know probably have a lower "carbon footprint" than the typical 2 child family. Mom often stays home, more meals are cooked from scratch (less driving to take-out, less packaging, etc), clothes are passed down among many siblings, and then often passed on to another family, toys are reused many times before being discarded, etc.

Besides the fact that I don't agree with the whole premise of people being bad for our planet, that is.