It's ridiculous that the debate about how to mitigate inevitable global warming/climate change never touches on the role that the actual mining of carbon dioxide-producing substances plays in the whole chain of events. If you mine/tap something, it's going to be used. And countries like Australia with massive coal deposits, etc, should consider limiting the actual mining of these substances. A handful of people in Australia are getting rich from the mining boom, which is in turn inflating the Australian dollar, which in turn is hurting export industries like services, tourism and manufacturing, which actually employ the vast majority of people. The people getting rich from mining are not going to be alive when their children and grandchildren suffer the consequences.
And any 'debate' about climate change should be dispatched thus: 30% of carbon dioxide in the current atmosphere was emitted during the industrial revolution. It takes 20-30 years for the resulting climate change to manifest. And the ocean is absorbing the elevated levels of CO2, making it more acidic. There are going to be dire consequences even if all carbon emissions were halted now. We are only now seeing the effects of carbon emitted in the 1980s.
There will be a disintegration of civil, social, infrastructural and legal relations in the coming decades. It will be difficult to co-ordinate anything. It isn't going to be only people in the third world dying from tropical diseases, etc; people in the developed world will not have access to pharmaceuticals for diseases such as HIV, cancer, heart disease, diabetes and arthritis. Maybe the realisation of this combined with self-interest will be the only thing that will prompt people in countries like Australia to consider banning the export of fossil fuels.
19 April 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

0 comments:
Post a Comment