Climate change is a reality. However, the world has accepted it. But the oil-producing countries come in front of this reality. They don't believe this fact because they think that they will suffer from the cessation of fossil fuel production. Due to this, they are not allowing clean energy policies in the world. Saudi Arabia, China, Russia, Iran, America, and some other Gulf countries whose economy runs on oil. They are not ready to follow international protocols and deals regarding climate change. But they probably don't know that the consumption of fossil fuels will increase due to the tyranny of these countries. Due to this greenhouse gases will be produced. This will further destroy the ozone layer. The temperature of the earth will increase further. When the temperature increases, the weather will change because of it. The result will be that agriculture will be destroyed, due to which food shortage will occur. The melting of glaciers will increase natural disasters. The intensity of heat will increase. Pandemic outbreaks would be common. Scientists are already making predictions. But some black sheep feed/skeptics, who been fed the money by oil companies. They are also creating division among people by giving different opinions. But it is a fact that if the world does not make timely decisions, there will be a lot of loss. God forbid, its effects will be on the whole world. Millions of lives may be lost. So there is still time. The world should take climate change seriously and find a solution to it.
Dear friend Rashid Ali Khuhro
I completely agree with you. Climate change is a real and urgent issue that requires immediate action from all countries and individuals. The burning of fossil fuels is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, which are causing global warming and climate change. It is important for countries to shift towards cleaner sources of energy like wind, solar, hydro, and geothermal power.
International protocols like the Paris Agreement and the Kyoto Protocol have been established to mitigate the effects of climate change. However, as you mentioned, some countries are not following these protocols, which can hinder progress towards a sustainable future. It is important for countries to work together and take collective action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and combat climate change.
In addition to shifting towards clean energy, individuals can also take actions in their daily lives to reduce their carbon footprint. This can include using public transportation, reducing meat consumption, and minimizing energy consumption in households and offices.
It is crucial that we take timely action to address climate change before it is too late. As you mentioned, the consequences of inaction can be severe and impact millions of lives. It is our responsibility as global citizens to work towards a sustainable and livable future for ourselves and future generations.
Kaushik Shandilya
Please understand the technology does not exist that allows elimination of fossil fuel.
Further, urgency is not clear. Draconian predictions of disasters, such as you so easily offer, have not proven true. Leading many to doubt urgency. Tho they may accept climate change, in balance, they are not willing to give up their lives to a fictionalized and reduced state.
Very simply - folks are familiar with information so often and so dramaticallyy repeated but are not enlisted in the urgency and obvious compromise to quality of life. Even totalitarian states dare not flog their populations to the vision of diminished state of existence.
Dear friend Rashid Ali Khuhro and Phil Geis
While it is true that there is currently no single technology that can fully replace fossil fuels, there are many existing and emerging technologies that can reduce our dependence on them and mitigate their environmental impact. Examples include renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, hydro, and geothermal power, as well as energy storage technologies and energy efficiency measures. Additionally, research and development efforts are underway to advance these technologies and develop new ones.
As for the urgency of addressing climate change, there is overwhelming scientific consensus that human activities, including the burning of fossil fuels, are causing global warming and its associated impacts, such as rising sea levels, more frequent and severe heatwaves, droughts, and extreme weather events. These impacts are already being felt around the world and are projected to worsen without significant action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The urgency lies in the fact that the longer we wait to take action, the more difficult and costly it will be to mitigate and adapt to these impacts.
While some specific predictions about the impacts of climate change may be uncertain, the overall trend and severity of these impacts is well-established and supported by a large body of scientific evidence. It is important to consider the potential risks and consequences of inaction and take steps to address them proactively.
Kaushik Shandilya
Please, repeating what we all know is useless. Spare us the pedantry.
Note how well those "mitigation " strategies worked for Europe - at great expense,no meaningful emissions reductions at great geopolitical risk. with competing environmental concerns, some are even eliminated out of hand. We can also point at the cartoonish proposals from the US - whose only reality is profound cost.
Compelling profound societal change when technology does not exist will not obtain necessary reductions but will alienate many toward the effort, esp. when the draconian "existential" disaster predictions fail to materialize.
It also brings the essential question of totalitarian enforcement vs. freedom and individual rights.
Global climate predictions based on unverified models are fake news. The important action needed is Adaptation (e.g., the Canadian R2000 home insulation upgrade program and a focus on building more nuclear energy power stations). A large body of climate researchers understand the weaknesses of windmill and solar panel power generation (e.g., TWTW and Heartland Institute). What we are witnessing is not global climate change on the scale of the Iron/Roman Climate Optimum, but rather a global money grab for expensive hardware that will not be able to deliver the inexpensive power needs of nations going forward. Fortunately, some of our largest population nations understand the "size and meaning of the game".
Lest we forget, as I understand it, IPCC prediction models have never been verified. In the last 3000 years we have had a number of natural warm and cold intervals. Perhaps the most famous among the warm periods is the 700 years-long Iron/Roman Age Climate Optimum. Non-reliable power production from wind and sun will never be accepted because it will not be cheap. A better approach would be to follow the suggestion of the Reality Equation which states that: Sustainable development (including industrial air pollution abatement) + Adaptation = Resilience + Prosperity. The 5 nations mentioned above seem to understand the size and meaning of the game. Some of them have turned to nuclear energy sources that will contribute to both climate mitigation and industrial air pollution abatement while strengthening their respective economy's until cleaner and cost-effective technologies are developed.