Population change and CO2 Emissions are not Correlated

Technologies that are more profitable and more environmentally friendly
The best way to shift things to a smaller footprint is to develop solutions that are more profitable for those that use it while also having reduced externalities.
90% of CO2 emissions are from fossil fuels so shift to nuclear fission or develop nuclear fusion or solar/wind without using natural has for load balancing.
Example. Sky city factory produced skyscrapers – uses 5 times less concrete per square foot. Lower cost to build. More profitable for builder. Faster to build less financing cost for builder. High energy efficiency. More profitable for landlord and renters.
It will enable higher population density cities, which boosts per capita GDP.

Which Countries will have the future population growth ?
Many of those who propose population controls, need to look at the countries where there will be a lot of population growth to see if it is realistic to make those proposals.
In terms of future population (out to 2050).
1 billion more in Africa
500 million more in India
About two hundred million more in other parts of Asia.
Africa high population growth – Ethiopia, Uganda, Nigeria, Niger, Zambia , etc…
Asian high population growth – India, Pakistan, Philippines, etc…
Policy Impact and basic questions on whether population proposals are viable
Europe – population declining slightly
North America – flat except for immigration
South America – slow growth
Oceania immigration
So will higher population growth countries adopt restrictive policies ?
Will countries with flat population countries do more to restrict their populations and speed up the decline ?
Will the declining populations try to decline faster ? And if they did will that accelerate the dominance of countries and peoples with more population growth in the future ?