Just stop thinking to prove that climate is changed and the earth may face a crisis lead to deterioration of environment and loss of many coastal areas with the vagrancy of many human populations, disappearance of many rare species and socio-economic catastrophe, to think how we can overcome or reduce the impacts of climate change to keep pace with this change?
paper title:Negative effects of Dust storms on rural economy through industrial, agriculture And livestock
please go to my profile.
Whether climate change is real or not is still a debated issue. what is more certain is, however, climate is getting different from what we have got used to in the recent decades. It is therefore important to consider these 'deviations' in the behaviour of weather/climate in planning for development interventions. The cost of not doing so may prove to be too huge!!
Climate change is not debatable. Please see http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/
Of particular relevance to your question is the IPCC's working group II. The have assessed "vulnerability of socio-economic and natural systems to climate change, negative and positive consequences of climate change, and options for adapting to it. It also takes into consideration the inter-relationship between vulnerability, adaptation and sustainable development. The assessed information is considered by sectors (water resources; ecosystems; food & forests; coastal systems; industry; human health) and regions (Africa; Asia; Australia & New Zealand; Europe; Latin America; North America; Polar Regions; Small Islands). "
Many other scientist worldwide (not just climate scientists), industry and policy are already working together to find mitigation and adaptive strategies.
I teach a university class in climate change, and this is a statement that I think most scientists would agree with: It is incontrovertible that the climate has warmed significantly (faster and more than any time in the past 1000 year), and is warmer now than at any time in the past 400 years. The cause of the warming is not radiative forcing (changes in intensity of the suns radiation), and indeed the sun's radiation has decreased in the past 30 years, in opposition to the most dramatic warming. Anthropogenic production of CO2 from burning fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent from cutting down forests, has caused CO2 to increase from ~275 ppm to 399 ppm over the past 150 years. All evidence suggests that the warming we have experienced over the past 50 years is due primarily to rising levels of greenhouse gases (primarily CO2 and to a lesser extent methane, which we are also emitting). There is no alternative explanation to the warming that has even 5% support among climate scientists. Climagte change is not debateable, what we do about it is. I think that is what the question was about, Ana is right, there are many proposals for both mitigation of the cause of the damage (decreasing emissions) and adaptation (living with the droughts, floods, sea level rise, heatwaves, habitat loss and extinction).
I have to disagree that this is primarily a population size problem. It is not the size of the human population. In areas with rapidly growing populations (for example Africa) the per capita production of CO2 is extremely low because many are living in poverty or in dense cities with little fossil fuel use. It is the wealthy nations of the world that are the problem, and they have a much smaller share of the human population. It is not the size of the population that matters, it is consumption. It is not the poor, its the rich. The only way out of the looming disaster on the horizon is for us to burn less coal and oil, and the USA, Europe, China and India are the biggest problem.
Finally, warming has not stopped in the last 15 years, it has slowed, from 0.21 degrees/decade to 0.04 degrees. Most scientists are now looking at the heat transfer to the oceans and singling out the cause of the hiatus, as it is called, as being related to more heat going into the ocean. I think that NASA has an article on their website about the cause of the hiatus which is good reading for those interested in this phenomenon.
Many thanks for all!
Worldwide, the causes of climate change are not equal, the defense strategies are also depending on the resources of each country, I think the actions that should be taken will vary based on the main cause of climate change, the importance of the affected area,and the potency of the country. If this is the situation, we have to look to the developmental countries.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_the_most_appropriate_indicator_to_gauge_the_impacts_of_climate_change
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_it_time_we_shift_emphasis_from_technological_solutions_to_climate_change_focus_on_the_Human_DimensionIs_it_not_obvious_that_nature_can_heal3
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Atmospheric Sciences
- Climate Science
- Climate Change