BBC Learnings · Section 1
Climate change_ Are there too many people_
Hello, this is 6 Minute English from BBC Learning English. I'm Neil. And I'm Sam.
Level: B1 · 64 sentences
Transcript
- Hello, this is 6 Minute English from BBC Learning English.
- I'm Neil. And I'm Sam.
- We're talking about the environment in this programme, specifically climate change.
- Now Sam, what do you think...
- is the biggest cause of climate change?
- An obvious answer would be that climate change is the result of carbon emissions caused by humans.
- It's about people's carbon footprint – the measurement of how much carbon dioxide is produced by someone's everyday activities.
- That makes sense. But recently some scientists, especially in the West, have been focusing on another issue.
- the increasing number of people in the world, something known as overpopulation.
- In this programme, we'll be discussing the controversial link between overpopulation and climate change.
- And as usual, we'll be learning some new vocabulary as well.
- Sounds good, Neil. But first, I have a question for you.
- Over the last 100 years, within one lifetime, the world's population has soared.
- At the start of the 20th century, it was around 1.5 billion.
- but how many people are there in the world today?
- Is it a 7 billion, b 8 billion or c 9 billion?
- I'll say around 8 billion people live on the planet today.
- OK Neil, I'll reveal the answer later in the programme.
- Since climate change is caused by human activities, it seems common sense that fewer people would mean lower carbon emissions.
- But in fact, the connection isn't so simple.
- Not everyone emits carbon equally, and people in the Western world produce far more than people in sub-Saharan Africa or Asia.
- Arvind Ravikumar is Professor of Climate Policy at the University of Texas.
- He's made the surprising calculation that an extra two billion people born in low-consuming countries would actually add very little to global carbon emissions.
- Here, Kate Lamble and Neil Rozelle, presenters of BBC World Service programme The Climate Question, discuss Professor Ravi Kumar's findings.
- What he's saying is kind of astonishing, right?
- Two billion people is, to say the least, a lot.
- It's the combined population of Europe...
- And Africa. He's crunched the numbers and found that an extra 2 billion low-income people, as defined by the World Bank, these are people without cars, without electricity often, would see global emissions rise by just 1.5%.
- Add 2 billion high-income earners, that's people with cars and power and all the mod cons, and Arvid reckons emissions would rise by more than 60%.
- So when it comes to climate change and population, where you were born matters.
- Professor Ravi Kumar made his discovery after crunching the numbers, an idiom meaning performing many mathematical calculations involving large amounts of data.
- He concluded that whereas two billion low-income people would increase carbon levels very little, 2 billion high-income people would increase it a lot.
- That's because high-income populations have mod cons, which is short for modern conveniences, technology and machines like cars, fridges and air conditioning that make life easier and more pleasant.
- According to this view, the real problem is not overpopulation but overconsumption.
- Affluence – that's having lots of money and owning many things – has become a big factor in climate change.
- And that's true in poorer countries as well as richer ones.
- Listen to Rajesh Joshi, reporter for BBC World Service's The Climate Question, interviewing a rich Indian housewife, Priti Dagan, in her luxurious home in New Delhi.
- I need everything that I buy.
- You cannot be judgemental about anybody's needs and I derive a lot of happiness.
- out of being very, very drawn towards consumer things.
- And I love it. And I'm not apologetic about it.
- So if I tell you that poor people have a smaller carbon footprint as compared to their richer counterparts, do you feel apologetic about it?
- So the brain says, yes, we should be apologetic about it.
- But the heart does not agree.
- Yes, poor can't afford lots of stuff.
- So their carbon imprint is small.
- but here my heart wins over my brain because it gives me happiness.
- Priti does not feel apologetic about her shopping.
- She doesn't think that she should feel sorry.
- Shopping makes her happy and she lets her heart rule her head, an idiom meaning that you do something based on emotions rather than reason.
- Priti is being very honest.
- She is consuming and looking for happiness in a way that people in the West have been doing for decades.
- It seems overconsumption is a bigger cause of climate change than raw population numbers.
- Speaking of which... What was the answer to your question, Sam?
- Ah, yes. I asked about the current global population.
- You guessed it was around 8 billion people, which was the correct answer.
- According to the United Nations, the world's population reached 8 billion on November 15, 2022.
- Right, let's recap the vocabulary we've learned, starting with carbon footprint, a measurement of how much carbon dioxide someone's activities produce.
- If you crunch numbers, you perform many mathematical calculations involving large amounts of data.
- Modcons is short for modern conveniences – machines like cars, washing machines and fridges which make life easier and more pleasant.
- Affluence means having lots of money or material possessions.
- If you are apologetic, you show that you feel sorry for something harmful you have said or done.
- And finally, the idiom let your heart rule your head means to do something based on emotion and personal desires rather than for logical or practical reasons.
- For now, it's goodbye. Bye-bye.