If we assume that humans are the overriding cause of adverse climate change [note, this is something I do not agree with], then without curtailing the rapidly expanding human population everything else is a waste of time.
But lets assume that we ignore that for the moment - which is a bit like telling somebody with liver cirrhosis that its OK to continue drinking - but let's do it anyways.
What's next ?
o Animals farmed for meat is THE largest generator of greenhouse gases. I don't see anything at all being done to curtail this... in fact its expanding rapidly as the developing world develops.
o Fossil fueled power stations are next. I don't see any urgency to decommission the world's existing fossil fueled power stations and replace them with nuclear power sources. In fact fossil fueled power stations are continuing to expand too and our tolerance for nuclear programmes in places like Iran and North Korea is an indication of what would happen if countries around the world did decide to pursue that seriously.
o Now to transport. Why are we transporting things from one side of the world to the other when they could be produced locally ? Why do people all over the world commute to work each day when the vast majority could work from home ? Why is air travel expanding when it should be contracting ?
IF climate change will become so catastophic that we will be unable to adapt to it, and IF we are the the cause of this climate change THEN it is a MACRO problem than needs a MACRO solution. Nobody, not even the climate change proponents, are willing to come to terms with this... because they are intelligent enough to know that a MACRO, step, disturbance of the delicate equilibrium in which we live today would be absolutely cataclysmic.
So... thankfully common sense is prevailing... its better to do nothing than to do something stupid.
|
|