On November 15, the 8 billionth particular person on the planet was born. Well, kind of. That was the date chosen by United Nations demographers because the second the world crossed its newest inhabitants milestone. The precise date might be fallacious—maybe off by months or extra—however there are roughly a billion extra people alive at this time than there have been 11 years in the past. 

I hadn’t been paying shut consideration to the Day of 8 Billion. Milestones make good headlines, however concentrating on a couple of large numbers can obscure extra revealing developments that basically clarify how the world has modified since there have been simply 7 billion of us. Here are two examples. The proportion of individuals dwelling in excessive poverty has steadily declined over the previous decade. (In 2010, 16.3 percent of the world lived on lower than $2.15 a day, whereas at this time solely 9 percent of individuals stay on such a paltry quantity.) And in India and China—which contributed essentially the most new births up to now decade—GDP per capita and life expectancy have risen even whereas populations boomed. To put it merely, extra individuals are dwelling higher lives at this time than at virtually another level in human historical past.

As the Day of 8 Billion rolled round, my inbox crammed with a gradual drip of press releases warning that the milestone represented a planetary crisis point. I’ve a hunch as to why I used to be getting these tales despatched my method. A few months earlier, I’d written an article about why Elon Musk is wrong to fret about falling populations. In the close to time period, demographers identified to me, the world’s inhabitants is simply heading upward. Managing that enhance is the actual problem going through the planet proper now. In the eyes of NGO press officers and sure indignant folks on Twitter, this put me firmly within the camp of “journalists who are convinced that we should be less afraid of talking about ‘overpopulation’ and its effect on the environment.”

A whole lot of on-line protection concerning the Day of 8 Billion got here from the identical perspective. “It should not be controversial to say a population of 8 billion will have a grave impact on the climate,” learn one headline in The Guardian. On a primary degree, that’s utterly true. If every part else stays the identical, extra folks on the planet will imply greater carbon emissions. The local weather options charity Project Drawdown estimates that offering better family planning and schooling will assist keep away from 68.9 billion metric tons of CO₂ emissions by 2050—roughly equivalent to two years of emissions from fossil fuels and business.

We must tread rigorously once we discuss inhabitants and local weather change. It’s simple to take a look at a world of 8 billion and conclude that there are “too many” folks on the planet. But who do we actually imply once we discuss overpopulation? Someone dwelling within the United States is accountable for about 15 metric tons of CO₂  emissions per year. But within the eight international locations the place the vast majority of inhabitants progress by the yr 2050 will likely be concentrated, per capita emissions are just a fraction of US levels. In the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), which is projected to develop by greater than 120 million within the subsequent 20 years, every particular person produces simply 30 kilograms of CO₂  every year. Emissions are a consequence of consumption, not simply inhabitants.

The world’s richest individuals are the most important emitters. One examine from the World Inequality Lab discovered that as emissions have fallen for the center class in wealthy international locations, these from the top 0.001 percent have risen by 107 p.c. “When I see rich people with massive families I think, no, we don’t have the capacity to have more rich people on the planet,” says Lorraine Whitmarsh, a psychologist on the University of Bath who research habits and local weather change. If we actually wish to cut back emissions, then beginning with lowering consumption within the developed world, the place populations are stagnant, makes essentially the most sense.