The entire globe is facing a problem through the climate change. We all know that the climate change and global warming is an outcome of irresponsible human actions. Countries have signed the Paris agreement and are working to accomplish the net zero target at their best.
There are two arguments about the net zero target accomplishment. First, reduction is consumption which reduces the production, transportation, use of energy and ultimately reduces the emissions. Second, financing carbon neutral, green, clean and sustainable projects will gradually reduce the emissions.
Given these facts, which one do you think weighs more to help the environment and to accomplish the global net zero target?
We have a small evidence on the financing side (https://blog.bham.ac.uk/business-school/2023/03/28/green-bonds/) and working for causal evidence. I look forward to your thoughts for discussions.
I think there should be a serious and effective global effort to address climate change and environmental support, especially by finding serious and effective peaceful solutions to hotbeds of tension and wars that destroy the environment for long periods that are difficult to replace. Because with wars, huge areas of forests and animals are destroyed, examples (Syria, Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, many countries in Africa and Asia, and finally Ukraine). all UN slogans about sustainable Development and environment protection and ..... ext are a slogans only.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Condensed Matter Physics
- Zero