Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Hot Air Alert: New Report Repeats Old B.S., Claims Immigration Causes Pollution

Posted by Walter Ewing, Immigration Impact at 12:10 PM on July 6, 2009.


Such "green" xenophobia is common among anti-immigrant groups, but blaming immigrants for greenhouse gas emissions won't fix anything.
pollution

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

In a new "special report" released on July 1, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) regurgitates an old and deeply flawed argument: that immigration causes pollution. Specifically, the report claims that, because immigration increases the size of the U.S. population, it also increases U.S. energy consumption, which increases U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, which contributes to global warming. If this line of reasoning seems a tad weak, that’s because it is. As Andrea Nill writes for the ThinkProgress Wonk Room, the report relies largely on "anecdotes and inferences" in an "attempt to pander to progressive soft spots" on the environment.
The FAIR report, entitled "Immigration, Energy and the Environment," neglects to mention a seemingly obvious fact: that a few people can pollute a lot, or a lot of people can pollute a little. Even in countries with similar standards of living, there is not a direct, one-to-one relationship between population size and the production of greenhouse gases or other pollutants. For instance, according to the World Resources Institute, the United States is home to 23% fewer people than the European nations of the EU-15, yet produced 70% more greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, as of 2000. The production of greenhouse gases in the United States is a function not of population size, but of the degree to which we as a society rely upon fossil fuels, power plants, industrial processes, and automobiles that actually produce greenhouse gases.

The faux environmentalism on display in FAIR's report is common among the other anti-immigrant groups, such as NumbersUSA and the Center for Immigration Studies, which were spawned over the years by uber-nativist John Tanton. Yet this brand of "green xenophobia" offers no useful guide for the formulation of effective policies on immigration, energy, or the environment. Blaming immigrants for greenhouse gas emissions won't fix the dysfunctional U.S. immigration system or reduce the U.S. economy's dependence on polluting and non-renewable fossil fuels. The most that FAIR can hope to accomplish with its report is to offer an environmental fig leaf behind which anti-immigrant policymakers and commentators can attempt to hide.

Digg!

Tagged as: immigration, green xenophobia


How Does a Religious Cult Have the Clout to Delay Health Care Vote?
To keep House vote on track, Pelosi struggles to appease the Catholic church and The Family cult on abortion language.
Post by Adele Stan. November 6, 2009.
CNBC Reporter: NYC Marathon Winner Not Really American, "He's Like a Ringer You Hire to Work a Couple Hours at Your Office"
For the first time since 1982, a U.S. citizen won the New York City marathon. For sports writer Darren Rovell, "it's not as good as it sounds."
Post by Liliana Segura. November 3, 2009.
"America's Toughest Dictator"? FBI Investigating Joe Arpaio for Using Office to Bully Opponents
The feds are reportedly looking at a pattern of law enforcement being used to intimidate political opponents.
Post by Joshua Holland. November 3, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Regardless of how you feel about immigration...
Posted by: g on Jul 6, 2009 3:18 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... a lie is a lie. These people once tried to infiltrate the Sierra Club with the same kind of BS. It didn't work. There are good arguments for immigration control, but this ain't one of them. Moreover, there is something seriously wrong with the idea that US citizen and legal residents can keep f*cking up the environment as long as they keep the number of people doing it under control (according to the same line of thought, we should limit the number of babies Americans have), and as long as people in other countries don't have the money and resources to do the same.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Huh?
Posted by: shanbrom@aol.com on Jul 15, 2009 4:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Doesn't the equation go I=PAT, Impacts (like pollution)=Population X Affluence X Technological Efficiency? All else being equal a greater population means greater pollution. Is this difficult to understand?
Check out CA's Central Valley, growing at 25% per decade for several decades, nearly 100% due to immigration. Once pristine, it now hosts the smoggiest city in the US, Arvin. It is no lark to walk among the giant Sequoia trees, wheezing and hacking at 6000 feet in smog that is now far worse than LA, about 70 alert days a year.
I really don't understand the low quality of journalism alternet promulgates concerning immigration. It's mere polemic and very bad polemic, at that. It's like reading Pravda before the fall of communism.
The US needs to stabilize its population. Since immigration accounts for about 65% of our population growth, we need to reduce (not cease) immigration in order to stabilize our population. Even if we were to take drastic steps today the US will certainly hit 400 million. Let's make that the cap, no?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Fight the Great American Bantustan
Posted by: shanbrom@aol.com on Jul 15, 2009 9:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree that the US must both control its population AND reduce its consumption (by about half, immediately). However, you are wrong about "these people infiltrating the SC." The SC was infiltrated by pro-immigration plutocrat David Gelbaum who "acquired" the SC population policy around 1993 for donations totaling about $100 million. See susps.org. High levels of immigration to the US are totally consistent with globalization. It's just globalization in situ, our own private bantustan of 40 million or so Americans living in poverty. I hope you'll see what I'm talking about. I think you will.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]