The last thing the world needs now is a baby boom

Regarding Peggy ODonnell Heffingtons April 23 op-ed, Want a baby boom? Fight climate change. : The last thing the world needs now is a baby boom. Had the world population been constant since 1970, rather than approximately doubling as it has done, assuming the same growth of per capita carbon emissions, the atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration would now be far less, and its growth rate would be half what it now is. Instead of about 15 years, it would take about 50 more years to reach 450 parts per million , a widely accepted maximum for avoiding climate catastrophe. Not only would there have been less warming to date, far more time would be available to carefully develop and deploy optimal clean energy technologies. Much of the pain and disruption that will result from the now-necessary crash program would have been avoided. Of course, stabilizing the population would not require potential parents to have no children, only fewer on average. John P. Apruzese , Springfield The writer is a member of Astronomers for Planet Earth.