22 Days Of Immigration-As-Usual Will Negate Benefits of Sarnia Solar Power Project


The same way of thinking that got us into our current environmental problems is not going to get us out.

All I hear in the news is how we are looking for alternative energy sources, obviously to support more population growth.

Whatever energy humans have been able to exploit, has been accompanied by growth in their population. Unfortunately, this only makes them more dependent on new energy sources.

If humans did stumble upon a new source of energy more abundant than oil, it is probable that there would be a corresponding population explosion that would rapidly wipe out the benefits of the new energy source.

Here is a specific Ontario example of how additional energy produced by alternative energy sources, when combined with Canada's high immigration numbers, does not improve the situation. In fact, it only makes matters worse.

A 900 acre Solar panel farm is planned near Sarnia, Ontario. Let's assume that its purpose is to serve domestic Ontario needs, to relieve the pressure on Ontario's finite electricity-generating capacity, and be part of a plan to replace current environment-unfriendly power generation.

According to http://www.windaction.org/news/9185 , the solar farm will generate 40 megawatts, enough electricity to power 6,000 homes.

As of 2001, there were about 2.6 people per household in Canada. ( http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/mmnr/CMHC/ ) That means that those 6,000 homes shelter roughly 15,600 people. If Canada takes 262,000 immigrants per year (as it did in 2006), it takes 717 immigrants per day. Within about 22 days of immigration, it has taken close to 15,600 new people. At that time, the benefits of the solar power marvel near Sarnia are used up.

In other words, in less than 1 month of business-as-usual immigration, if we are to satisfy the assumptions we have made, Canada will need another solar farm or some other energy source to supply the needs of the other newly-arrived.

The problem doesn't stop there. The 15,600 immigrants who are added in those 22 days will produce a large additional negative environmental effect for the following reasons:

(1) The construction of this solar electricity plant will consume large quantities of fossil fuels and produce a large number of GHG.
(2) The farm land that the solar panel site has taken over will be lost forever, thereby increasing our reliance on other areas, either on other Canadian farm land whose supply is very limited or on nearby foreign farm land whose supply is decreasing because of population demands.
(3) The immigrants will consume much more than the household electricity produced by the solar farm. Examples of their consumption will be water, electronics, air-travel, paper products, etc. Increases in human population inevitably lead to the expropriation of other areas for the use of the new people.

The 246,600 immigrants who arrive in the rest of the year will not only require other energy sources but also wiill produce additional negative environmental effects. The key point is that it is assumed by those who support Canada's high immigration levels that Canada (to say nothing of the rest of the planet) can support unlimited numbers of people and that humans can find unlimited sources of energy and food.

History has demonstrated that human population growth is inversely proportional to healthy bio-diversity, farmland protection and wetlands prervation. More people means less of the other three.

It should be clear that when a country increases its population, it also negates the gains made by energy-efficient technology. Studies done in other countries have made similar correlations between immigrant-driven population growth and increased energy use and pollution.

Professor Mark Diesendorff of the University of New South Wales warned that Australia would not be able to reduce its GHG emissions if it continued its mass immigration policies. It is no coincidence that while Australias population has grown 31% since 1990 its GHG emissions have increased 30%.

Leon Kolankiewicz, now associated with the environmental group Numbers U.S.A., demonstrated that since 1970, 88% of Americas increase in energy use was due to an increase in population, mostly driven by immigration. Only 12% was attributable to an increase in per capita energy consumption. In other words, its not so much that people are driving SUVs rather than fuel efficient cars. Its just that there are 3 million more drivers each year out there.

In the UK, government statisticians reveal that of the 11 million new houses that will need to be built before 2050much of it on formerly sacrosanct Greenbelt land59% will be built to accommodate Britains growing population, nearly 70% of that caused by immigration. More immigrants means more people, more houses, more energy consumption, more emissions in one form or another.

Since the publication of Dr. William Rees watershed book, “Our Ecological Footprint”, the Green mantra has been to reduce our individual footprint. But as these studies show, it is the sum total of individual ecological footprints that matter. Ultimately, its a numbers game.

As always, environmental guru Garrett Hardin said it best. The population problem has no technical solution….”

–Brishen Hoff