What can politicians do to stop climate change?

Joined
Feb 26, 2015
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Points
1
I'm new in the forum and I dont' know if this topic has already been discussed. If so, be free to delete it but let me know where I can discuss it.

But here it is: we all know that if we want to stop the climate change we need to reach the goal of emitting no more than 400 Gigatons of CO2. Why? Because this will limit global temperature rise to 2 degrees Celsius - a rise that the Earth can support. But that will only happen if countries like India, China and the US work together. I read a post a few days ago about this but I really would like to hear what you have to say about it. What can be done to stop climate change?

Here is the link of the post I read: How can politicians stop climate change

:)
 

Delta4Embassy

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
25,745
Reaction score
3,033
Points
280
Location
Earth
I'm new in the forum and I dont' know if this topic has already been discussed. If so, be free to delete it but let me know where I can discuss it.

But here it is: we all know that if we want to stop the climate change we need to reach the goal of emitting no more than 400 Gigatons of CO2. Why? Because this will limit global temperature rise to 2 degrees Celsius - a rise that the Earth can support. But that will only happen if countries like India, China and the US work together. I read a post a few days ago about this but I really would like to hear what you have to say about it. What can be done to stop climate change?

Here is the link of the post I read: How can politicians stop climate change

:)
I'm not convinced anyone in power wants to stop it. If they wanted to, they could. That they haven't suggests they're gaining something from it.

60% of the planet's population lives close enough to the oceans that sea level rise will effect them. If you're some 1% cabal of uber elites secretly running the world behind the scenes, deliberately doing things like climate change could well be making you lots of money.

Simple truth is the way the world's run right now isn't sustainable. But big meaningful changes never come about because it's the right thing to do. They only come about after great loss of life. As 3rd world nations advance and develop industry on par with the industrialized world, the pollution they'll generate wll be massive. Of course, if these populations are wiped out, the need for such emerging technologies will be less as will be the pollution.

While some massive genocidal conspiracy sounds like paranoid fiction from an X-Files episode, once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable must be the truth.
 

Luddly Neddite

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
63,820
Reaction score
9,874
Points
2,040
1. Cap-and-trade system


One is a cap-and-trade system (like the one under the Kyoto protocol). Such a system defines the amount of emissions we want to limit ourselves to and then distributes it to different emitters (countries, industries, companies, etc).


Anyone, who wants to emit more than the allocated quota, needs to buy emission rights from someone else, who will then emit less. As a result carbon becomes a tradable commodity.


The trading will create a market place that ensures that carbon is emitted in the most efficient manner. Those who can easily and cheaply reduce their emissions (e.g. though more efficient processes or a fuel switch) will likely do so and generate excess emissions reductions. These can then be sold to other market participants that cannot easily reduce their own emissions.


2. Carbon tax


A second approach is a carbon tax. The basic idea of a carbon tax is to price the cost of climate change into the fossil fuels. That would make them more expensive and thereby reduce their use. Today, for example, the price for electricity generated from coal in India takes into account only the market price of coal.


What is not taken into account are so-called negative externalities, such as the cost associated with the effects of climate change proportionate to the carbon emissions of coal or the health costs of air pollution. A carbon tax would place the burden on the consumer not the producer. This would be beneficial for all countries that manufacture for export, such as China, Germany or in future, perhaps, India.


I've read that it really cannot be stopped, that we've reached the tipping point.

Be that as it may, as long as money is more important the future our children face, nothing much will be done.

Welcome to the board and thanks for posting this.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top