Climate Justice?

A favorite theme of those in favor of open borders is that "migrant justice is climate justice" or immigration justice=environmental justice".

This excerpt from a blog post arguing that immigration justice and climate justice are inextricably linked is a typical example of how progressive leftists attempt to paint a narrative that an open border is virtuous.

Activists fighting for immigration justice and climate justice are beginning to recognize that their work is bound to one another, and we must all recognize that when immigration justice or climate justice is pushed forward, the other has a foundation to build on. Together they can catalyze a movement that pushes for a safe, fair, sustainable, and inclusive environment for all. 

Would it surprise you to learn that those are the words of a graduate of UC Berkeley with degrees in Environmental Economics & Policy, and Conservation & Resource Studies? Who would have thought  someone would have learned this studying at Berkeley?

Source: https://www.ecowatch.com/1-000-youth-take-to-the-streets-demanding-climate-justice-1882118334.html

Arguing that "immigration justice is climate justice" or that open borders in the United States contributes to a safe, sustainable environment might look good on a banner or make a cool sound bite during a street protest.

However, actual facts and reality leave no doubt that open borders do nothing insofar as solving or affecting climate change.

In addition, allowing millions of illegal immigrants into the United States is the last thing one would support if you were concerned about sustainability.

I continue to be surprised that Republicans don't make this point about illegal immigration and its adverse effects on sustainability in that it is such an important issue with Democrats and younger voters.

The immigration laws were established to provide order for our society. The laws were considered necessary to provide for the entrance of an established number of immigrants annually that could be assimilated without disrupting and degrading the experience of U.S. citizens and others who are rightfully here. In sum, the laws were enacted to foster sustainability for society.

Laws that have been completely ignored by the Biden administration for over three years.

Adding too many immigrants in a short period of time puts too much strain on our resources. It puts unnecessary strain on everything in our society---our water, our sewer systems, our roads, the electric grid, our infrastructure and our environment. It contributes to congestion and urban sprawl.

Add to this what it does to increase the financial strain on our schools and our health system and cost pressure on rents and housing costs, not to mention our law enforcement and justice system.

Illegal immigration is the worst thing you could be in favor of if you are concerned about sustainability in our society.

The argument that immigration justice is climate justice is also ludicrous on its face.

Open border advocates want us to believe that having millions of people migrating from countries such as Mexico, Venezuela, El Salvador, Honduras and Haiti to the United States is going to help fight climate change and improve the global environment?

How does one come to that conclusion if they believe that human-induced carbon emissions are responsible for climate change?

If sustainability and the environment are primary goals, there should be no migration from low carbon emission countries to high carbon emission countries.

That should be obvious on its face.

Migrating people from low carbon to high carbon emission countries will increase overall global carbon emissions. It is an inescapable fact.

For example, the per capita carbon footprint in the United States is over four times that of Mexico and three times that of Venezuela. It is over 13 times that of El Salvador, 15 times that of Honduras and 53 times that of Haiti.

Why is that? There are few factories and other large productive facilities in those countries. There are limited conveniences like air conditioning. Homes and apartments are smaller. There are fewer vehicles per capita. Many need to walk to work or shop.

Why do migrants want to immigrate to the United States?

They are in search of a better life and prosperity.

Who can fault them for wanting to better themselves?

However, 99% of the population of the world would improve their lot in life by migrating to the United States.

Do we take them all? 

How is that sustainable?

That prosperity is fueled by energy—most of which is carbon-based,. a reality that will continue for some time into the future unless nuclear, solar or another source proves gains acceptance and proves to be affordable.

As I have written before, there is no such thing as a rich, low energy country.

Energy makes the world economy go. We need it for anything we want to do. It needs to be available and it needs to be affordable. The economy does not work without energy. The consumer cannot spend on other things in the economy if they are spending excessive amounts on energy. If the consumer doesn't spend, the economy does not grow. If the economy does not grow, more and more people go without jobs.

When muscle power was the prime energy source in the world we could produce very little. Firewood and domesticated animals improved our ability to produce. However, the introduction of energy sources like coal, oil and gas allowed us to greatly leverage our productive capacity. 

It is not a coincidence that the industrial revolution coincided with the introduction of so-called fossil fuels beginning with coal and moving on to oil and gas and the development of machines that were powered by these energy sources.

The argument is now being made that all of the migrants of the world who want to come to the United States must be allowed in because their home countries are becoming uninhabitable due to climate change.

Let's take a look at how that statement squares with real data.

Here is a chart that shows human deaths in Latin American and the Caribbean from so-called "climate-change disasters" between 1990 to 2023.

It clearly shows that the last ten years has seen far less deaths from climate change disasters in that ares of the world than in the previous twenty years.

Number of human deaths due to climate change-related disasters in Latin America and the Caribbean from 1990 to 2023
Source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1409757/number-of-human-deaths-due-to-climate-change-related-disasters-latin-america/

Where exactly is the climate crisis that is forcing people to flee their home countries to migrate to the United States?

An alternative argument is made that people are being forced to migrate due to the failures in the agricultural sector due to crop failures caused by extreme weather. Of course, agriculture supports many people in these countries.

However, in almost all Latin and Caribbean countries, crop production is higher (most recent data is 2021) than it was when compared to a base period of 2004-2006. In the chart below, 100 represents the crop index level in the base period. 

Source: https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/crop_production_index/Latin-Am/

Haiti is an obvious exception, with crop production only amounting to about 77% of what it was in 2004-2006. However, this is largely a function of the political situation in the country. The same can be said to be true in socialist Venezuela.

Look no further than comparing the Dominican Republic and Haiti in the data above. These countries share the same island in the Caribbean. Crop production in the Dominican Republic is 20% higher than it was in the base period while Haiti is down almost 25%. Climate change is ravaging one end of the island but not the other?

For context, the crop production index for the United States in this data set is 100.8 and in Canada it is 82.8. The majority of the Latin American countries have actually seen crop production increases at levels higher than in the United States but they are being ravaged by climate change?. Almost all are better than Canada. Are we to consider Canadians as climate migrants as well?

Beyond all of this, open border advocates argue that allowing illegal migration in to the United States is still beneficial because the average migrant only utilizes about 80% of the resources and carbon emissions of U.S. citizens.

That might be true but it is still multiples more than these individuals would use in their home countries. 

One study estimated that a migrant in the United States produces on average four times the amount of carbon emission they would in their home country. 

If one is concerned about carbon emissions impacting the climate the last thing anyone should be in favor of us is taking in more illegals immigrants who will immediately expand their carbon footprint many times beyond what it would be in their home countries.

Do not be fooled by a false narrative.

Migrant justice is not climate justice.

There is also nothing sustainable about taking in 10+ million illegal immigrants over a three year period and claiming that it is beneficial for our environment or that of the world at large.

The assertion within that narrative is not supported by facts or logic.

Climate justice?

What about justice for the American citizens and legal immigrants who play by the rules and have to endure the chaos, crime and costs of the compounding effects of illegal immigration?

How about some justice for them?

For additional context read my previous blog post on "The Compounding Effects of Illegal Immigration".