|
In response to
"#1 is redundant and #2 simply not true "
by
Danedukenuuk
|
psst. It's not really called Global Warming any more, it's Global Climate Crisis ...
Posted by
Beryllium (aka grayman)
Dec 8 '09, 10:49
|
Global Warming is just the observed average, it doesn't actually say what will happen to the weather and environment. As oceans die and storms become more fierce, it will become apparent that even if humanity isn't the root cause, we are an accelerant of the natural cycle - and just like in a fire, accelerants tend to make things a LOT worse. It won't be traceable back to one single event, but rather, to a collective apathy with regard to environmental concerns.
So, to that end, things like "use less petrol" and "save the rainforests" and "use fewer chemicals" and "regulate industry so that waste materials are properly disposed of" will, hopefully, cumulatively reduce our accelerative contribution to climate instability.
Carbonhagen will probably be equally as effective as Kyoto, essentially just political grandstanding to satiate the masses, but hopefully something will eventually be done. All we need is a positive corporate use-case/ROI-profile on being green. Right now, companies are doing the green thing because it's trendy - if there was more profit involved, rather than just doing it for image, it would solve a lot of problems.
|
Responses:
|