Tags

, , , , , ,

 

(Three-minute read) 

WOW!

AFTER TWO WEEKS OF NEGOTIATION WE HAVE MANAGED TO PRODUCE A HAPHAZARD APPROACH TO CLIMATE CHANGE. 

 

The headline is that leaders from the countries that created and worsened climate change have failed — squandering the opportunity to take the truly transformational actions that this crisis demands.

SO WHAT NOW?

We are going to reconvene in Egypt in 2022.

When the fact will still remain that we are still far off the 1.5C target, and we will still need on-time and effective policies and legislation to make the existing but insufficient pledges a reality.

Pledges from COP26 put us on track for global warming of between 1.8C and 2.4C.

( If you want to see what a 2.4c temperature will look like see the previous post) 

As Prime Minister of Barbados Mia Mottley said as the conference began: “How many more voices and how many more pictures of people must we see on these screens without being able to move, or are we so blinded and hardened that we can no longer appreciate the cries of humanity?”

“Can there be peace and prosperity if one-third of the world literally prospers and the other two things of the world live under siege and face calamitous threats to our well-being?” 

The climate crisis threatens the lives and livelihoods of billions of people around the world and could unravel decades of gains made in the fight against poverty.

The announcements the private sector made at COP26 were predictable and can be broadly lumped into three buckets: the defiant, the greenwashing, and the genuinely positive.

It’s vital we understand what this means in reality.

Neither they nor our world leaders grasped that there is no negotiation with the climate and  Net-zero essentially means contributing nothing to global warming.

It is not carbon neutrality.

Although that term also refers to bringing the overall emissions level to nothing, it can commonly be achieved by offsetting the equivalent amount of carbon emissions reductions elsewhere. For example, a rich country could pay for its carbon budget to be offset by a developing country. 

We cannot stop the climate crisis.

Establishing a long-term net-zero target is one thing. Properly funding it is quite another. It’s not just possible — it’s essential. 

Cop26 should have translated into immediate action if it was to have any real meaning to the planet and us.

There might be strong evidence that parallel worlds probably exist, but to have a parallel world one must have a world in the first place.  

All human comments are appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin