Save the climate, have no children. Or, even better, eradicate mankind.

rohingya-refugee-children-smiles-while-holding-an-umbrella-during-heavy-at-the-kutupalang-makeshift-refugee-camp-in-coxs-bazar_1499863299887947_v0_hPublished today in the journal Environmental Research Letters,  a study from Lund University finds that the four actions that most substantially decrease an individual’s “carbon footprint” are: eating a plant-based diet, avoiding air travel, living car-free, and having smaller families.

As the abstract of the paper states:

We recommend four widely applicable high-impact (i.e. low emissions) actions with the potential to contribute to systemic change and substantially reduce annual personal emissions: having one fewer child (an average for developed countries of 58.6 tonnes CO2-equivalent (tCO2e) emission reductions per year), living car-free (2.4 tCO2e saved per year), avoiding airplane travel (1.6 tCO2e saved per roundtrip transatlantic flight) and eating a plant-based diet (0.8 tCO2e saved per year).

Having less children is thus the by far most effective action among the four options proposed, its impact being more than 20 times stronger than that of the “second best”, living car-free.

Man is no longer the supreme being within God´s creation, so why should he exist at all? Pushing the researchers´thought to its logical consequence, the most efficient way of humanity’s “carbon footprint” would be to totally eradicate humanity. Short of that, one would always have to distinguish between some privileged human beings who would be allowed to exist and/or procreate, and others who don’t have that privilege.

As one might expect, those worthy of existence/procreation, will be white, educated, mostly anglo-saxon, atheist/secular, and duly respectful of prevailing LGBT/Gender, Malthusian, and population control policies.