8 lbs, 21 inches, 3,800 diapers, and 1,525 tons of carbon: Sources

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Americans emit 1,525 tons of CO2 emissions: United Nations Statistics Division; National Institute on Aging.

72% of American adults have children: “Gallup Poll.”

Kids fear global warming: BrainPOP National Earth Day Survey, 2007.

U.S.’ CO2 emissions far greater than Africa’s: “Population Connection Factsheet.”

One American child produces as much CO2 as 106 Haitians: United Nations Statistic Division.

Zahara Jolie-Pitt’s yearly CO2 emissions: United Nations Statistic Division.

A typical baby uses 3,800 disposable diapers: 2005 U.K. Government Study.

96% of American babies wear disposable diapers: The Diaper Industry Source, Richer Consulting Services.

Brits offset their kids’ diaper waste: allthingsgreen.net.

Hungarians offset babys’ CO2 footprint: TreeHugger.

Lower birth rates in China equals fewer CO2 emissions: Zhang Weiqing, Minister of National Population and Family Planning Commission; United Nations Statistic Division.

Twin births in the U.S. on the rise: Blue Cross Blue Shield.

Youth and civil conflict go hand and hand: Population Connection.

Uganda, Monaco, and war: University of Pennsylvania professor Steven Feierman and Stanford professor Richard Roberts.

Russia’s “conceive a patriot” day: “Missing: The ‘Right’ Babies,” The Nation.

Singapore’s dating program combats its low birthrate: lovebyte.org; CIA Factbook.

The “Quiverfull” movement: quiverfull.com.

The Pope calls for tax incentives for big families: “Large Families Deserve Support, Pope Says,” Catholic World News; “Pope Benedict XVI Leads ‘Eco-friendly’ Youth Rally,” International Herald Tribune.

The seven new mortal sins: “Vatican Official: New Sins on Horizon,” CNN.

Catholic globalization: “Beyond Christianity: Protestant-Catholic Distinctions in Coming Global Christianity, Paul Sullins, The Catholic University of America.

The U.S.’ increasing fertility rate: Department of Health and Family Services, Wisconsin.

The bloating American home: “Housing Facts, Figures, and Trends, 2006,” National Association of Home Builders; “Housing Facts, Figures, and Trends, 2007,” National Association of Home Builders.

Americans and their SUVs: “National Household Travel Survey,” U.S. Department of Transportation.

SUV owner demographics: “SUVs Continue to Pull Market Share from Car Segments,” J.D. Power and Associates.

Polluting school buses: “School Bus Pollution Report Card 2006,” Union of Concerned Scientists; “School Bus Pollution Report Card 2002,” Union of Concerned Scientists.

Polluting idle school buses: Clean School Bus, Environmental Protection Agency.

Offsetting American kids’ TV viewing: “Reducing Children’s Television-Viewing Time: A Qualitative Study of Parents and Their Children,” Pediatrics; California Energy Commission; “How Much Greenhouse Gas Does Your Family Produce?Discover; Environmental Protection Agency.

Baby’s first TV: “The Media Family,” Kaiser Family Foundation.

Appetite for Destruction: Popline, The Info Project. Comparisons yielded through various CO2 converters.

The Ballooning TV Family: imdb.com; Discovery Channel.

Nagging tweens: “Thanks to Ads, Kids Won’t Take No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No, No for an Answer,” New American Dream.

American kids and their toy consumption: The Real Toy Story: Inside the Ruthless Battle for America’s Youngest Consumers, Eric Clark, Simon & Schuster, 2007.

Toys and diapers trashing beaches: Ocean Conservancy.

Disney World’s dirty laundry: Disney World Trivia and Facts.

An American child’s food consumption: “Expenditures on Children by Families, 2006,” USDA.

Cafeteria waste: “Reusable Lunchbox,” New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.

Julia Roberts tells all: “Julia Roberts on Motherhood, the Paparazzi, and Making Less Garbage,” Vanity Fair.

Julia Roberts and her lavish maternity suite: The Fabulous Life: Celebrity Kids, VH1.

Voluntary Human Extinction Movement: vhemt.org.

Celebrity Babies, for Fun and Profit:

Nicole Richie: “Send Us Your Baby Pictures, But Don’t Expect Millions,” Melissa Herbert, The Plain Dealer; Save the Children.

Jamie-Lynn Spears: “OK! Pays $1 Million for Jamie Lynn Spears Pregnancy Story,” Reuters; KidsHealth, Newmours Foundation.

Christina Aguilera: “Send Us Your Baby Pictures, But Don’t Expect Millions,” Melissa Herbert, The Plain Dealer; One Laptop Per Child.

J-Lo/Marc Anthony: “Send Us Your Baby Pictures, But Don’t Expect Millions,” Melissa Herbert, The Plain Dealer; “Parents and the High Price of Child Care,” National Association of Child Care Resources and Referral Agencies.

Brad Pitt/Angelina Jolie: “Send Us Your Baby Pictures, But Don’t Expect Millions,” Melissa Herbert, The Plain Dealer; Pitt did not respond to a written request for confirmation.

Tom Cruise/Katie Holmes: “Someone Wanted to See Me?Vanity Fair.

Sodden Impact:

First disposable diaper in U.S.: The Diaper Industry Source, Richer Consulting Services.

Pampers comes on line: The Diaper Industry Source, Richer Consulting Services.

Diapers create mounds of U.S. municipal waste in 1970: “Municipal Solid Waste in the United States,” Environmental Protection Agency; “2006 Municipal Solid Waste Characterization Data Tables,” EPA.

Diapers and U.S. municipal waste in 1980: “Municipal Solid Waste in the United States,” EPA; “2006 Municipal Solid Waste Characterization Data Tables,” Environmental Protection Agency.

Super-absorbent polymers in diapers: Hygiene Absorbent Products Manufacturers Committee.

Cabbage Patch diapers introduced: “Advertising; Designer Diaper Campaign,” Philip H. Dougherty, The New York Times, October 1, 1984.

Diapers and U.S. municipal waste in 1990: “Municipal Solid Waste in the United States,” EPA; “2006 Municipal Solid Waste Characterization Data Tables,” EPA; “Eight in 10 Say Pollution Threatens Their Lives,” Associated Press, June 11, 1990.

Dueling over diapers: “Disposable Versus Reusable Diapers: Health, Environmental and Economic Comparisons,” Arthur D. Little, Inc., Procter & Gamble, 1990; “Diapers: Environmental Impacts and Lifecycle Analysis,” Carl Lehrburger, Jocelyn Mullen, and C. V. Jones, National Association of Diaper Services, 1991; “The Politics of Diapers: A Timeline fo Recovered History,” Mothering magazine.

Pampers-paid doc tells parents not to rush toilet training: “Two Experts Do Battle Over Potty Training,” Erica Goode, The New York Times, January 12, 1999.

Diapers and U.S. municipal waste in 2000: “Municipal Solid Waste in the United States,” EPA; “2006 Municipal Solid Waste Characterization Data Tables,” EPA.

Elimination communication: Diaper Free Baby.

Diapers and U.S. municipal waste in 2006: “Municipal Solid Waste in the United States,” EPA; “2006 Municipal Solid Waste Characterization Data Tables,” EPA.

Julia Roberts on flushable diapers: “Julia Roberts on Motherhood, the Paparazzi, and Making Less Garbage,” Vanity Fair.

Pampers introduces large diapers: Procter & Gamble’s Baby Care Spokesperson; Pampers.

Disposable diapers’ life span: New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, Information Source: U.S. National Park Service; Missouri Department of Conservation.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate