Tag Archives: The cost of Climate Change.

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. THERE IS NO SINGLE SOLUTION THAT CAN ADDRESS CLIMATE CHANGE WHICH IS NOT GOING TO COST TRILLIONS AND TRILLIONS.

29 Monday Aug 2022

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. THERE IS NO SINGLE SOLUTION THAT CAN ADDRESS CLIMATE CHANGE WHICH IS NOT GOING TO COST TRILLIONS AND TRILLIONS.

Tags

, , ,

( Seven minute read)

It is now beyond the obvious that it is going to take trillions and trillions to reduce the impact of climate change.

It is also obvious that we are incapable of addressing any of the problems that climate change is waiting to reveal on the world on a global scale.

I DON’T KNOW ABOUT YOU BUT IT IS BEYOND MY COMPRENSION THAT WE REMAIN SO INACTIVE TO DO THE RIGHT THINK AND DEMAND THAT OUR POLITIONS GET REAL.

More than 800 million people—11% of the world’s population—can already feel the consequences of climate change in their daily lives, including increased frequency of natural disasters, prolonged droughts, and irregular weather patterns.

Extreme weather events are known to create poverty traps, or conditions linked to health, education, livestock, and assets that perpetuate the cyclical nature of poverty because people need a significant amount of capital to recover from them.

Since poverty and climate change is a two-way street, reductions in poverty
now can allow people to better adapt and respond to changing environmental conditions in the future.

WE ARE NOW JUST ON THE TRESHOLD OF REAPING THE REWARDS OF TRASHING OUR PLANET FOR CENTURIES FOR SHORT TERM PROFIT.

To day countries spend billions on defence, but there is no defence from climate change.

We all know that the impacts of climate change and global warming will have a snowball effect, generating more and more problems as the crisis unfolds world wide.

Yes we can invest in communities fighting the impacts of climate change at the local level but climate change impacts every form of life—humans, plants, and animals.

We all know it is happing.

Thanks to mass pollution – dumping million of tons of plastic into to our oceans, pumping trillion of tons of carbon into our atmosphere, the earth is now crises.

The simple truth is that no single solution can address every cause and effect of global climate change—it will take collective, significant actions at all levels to preserve the planet and protect our future.

This is now common sense not a scientific theory.

So what are we doing?

Spending $239 for every person on the planet, 2.1% of the world’s gross domestic product (GDP), on military budgets.  Poring up banks, Pouring money into GDP, No politician wants to tell us the real story of fossil fuel depletion.

The real story is that we are already running short of oil, at the same time, wind and solar and other “clean energy” sources are nowhere nearly able to substitute for the quantity of fossil fuels being lost.

This unfortunate energy story is essentially a physics problem.

Energy per capita and, in fact, resources per capita, must stay high enough for an economy’s growing population. When this does not happen, history shows that civilizations tend to collapse.

Politicians cannot possibly admit that today’s world economy is headed for collapse, in a way similar to that of prior civilizations.

Politicians will avoid talking about possible future economic problems related to inadequate energy supply. If there are energy supply problems, they need to be framed as being temporary, perhaps related to the war in Ukraine.

Politicians want to get re-elected. They want citizens to think that everything is OK.

Most high-level politicians are aware of the energy supply issue, but they cannot possibly talk about it.

Instead, they choose to talk about what would happen if the economy were allowed to speed ahead without limits, and how bad the consequences of that might be.

So politicians cannot tell the world how bad the energy situation really is.

Furthermore, politicians see that they can have more control over populations if they can direct citizens in a way that will use less energy.

Businesses also want to minimize problems.

They would like the news media to publish stories saying that any economic dip is likely to be very mild and temporary.

What is wrong is a physics problem.

The operation of our economy requires energy of the correct type and the right quantity. The economy is something that grows through the “dissipation” of energy.

Falling energy consumption is associated with economic contraction.

The truth physics terms, is that world economy is a dissipative structure, just as all plants, animals and ecosystems are.  All dissipative structures have finite lifespans, including the world economy.

Citizens around the world can sense that something is very wrong.

It looks like the economy may be headed for a serious recession in the near term.

If a person understands the connection between energy consumption and the economy, such a rapid drop in energy supply looks like something that would likely be associated with economic collapse.

The rich and powerful can see this change as a good thing if they themselves can profit from it. When there is not enough energy, the physics of the situation tends to lead to increasing wage and wealth disparities. Wealthy individuals see this outcome as a good thing: They can perhaps personally profit.

For example,

Bill Gates has amassed about 270,000 acres of farmland in the United States, including newly purchased farmland in North Dakota.

Estimates of how much money it would take to end global climate change range between $300 billion and $50 trillion over the next two decades.

——————-

Even now, I am one of a very small number of people in the world writing about this issue.

We are now seeing that the approach seems to produce inflation rather than more energy production.

If people are not to freeze in the dark in winter, longer-term solutions are needed

.Militaries around the world are no doubt well aware of the fact that there will not be enough energy supplies to go around. This means that the world will be in a contest for who gets how much.

In a war-like setting, we should not be surprised if communications are carefully controlled.

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

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

Advertisement

THE BEADY EYE SAYS. NOTHING EXCEPT CO2 WILL COME OUT THE COP26.

29 Friday Oct 2021

Posted by in Climate Change Summit Scotland 2021, Cop26.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAYS. NOTHING EXCEPT CO2 WILL COME OUT THE COP26.

Tags

, , , , , ,

 

(Ten-minute read) 

Cop26 described by the media as a “turning point for humanity” will be attended by upwards of 30,000 people, (including around 200 world leaders and thousands of press and media representatives.)

Are politicians promising real change that will prevent the world from breaching the maximum global average heating of 1.5C?

 Climate politics at COPs is complex and the stakes are high.

Even though the alarm bells are deafening, and the evidence is irrefutable with Global heating affecting every region on Earth, with many of the changes becoming irreversible, we will see a world fudging backed by Bla Bla with no enforceable plan that will go far enough to create a financing mechanism to support “net zero” by 2050.

On the contrary, we will see offerings of more of the same or worse. 

Since the 2015 Paris Agreement, the world is on track for emissions to rise by 16%. 

Will governments look beyond narrow national interests and act together for the planet and for us all?

NO

The need to create for Loss and Damage to enable poorer nations devastated by climate disasters to recover will not happen. 

The major historic emitters of greenhouse gases (mostly rich, former colonial powers) have a greater responsibility for causing climate change and should therefore bear more responsibility to decarbonize more quickly.

They should provide financial resources and share technology with the global south to help them both address the impacts of climate change and make the transition to a low-carbon economy.

So far three-quarters of this financial assistance was in the form of loans that the global south had to pay back. This type of finance increases the debt burden of the global south and makes these countries more vulnerable to financial crises.

Instead, climate justice demands that rich countries provide at least $400 billion a year in grant-based climate finance to the global south by 2030.

What’s more, there is no agreed mechanism for raising finance for loss & damage due to climate change (eg. the losses caused by more frequent cyclones or hurricanes).

This should be the guiding principle of the whole process – but too often rich countries seek to undermine it.

                                              ————-

Understanding the significance of what is being discussed is not always an easy task.

No single country can fix it on its own.

There are some developed nations and high carbon emitters that have yet to pull their weight. Australia, Canada, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Brazil, Mexico are in this category.

China and the United States are the world’s two largest carbon emitters and are a special case. 

Take the host the UK’s messaging on climate change. 

  • Approving the first new coal mine in 30 years.
  •  Licensing for new North Sea oil and gas exploration.
  •  Cutting taxes on flights and supporting expansion plans at seven airports in England.
  •  Scrapping the Green Homes Grant energy efficiency scheme early.
  •  Investing £27bn investment for new roads and highways, while reducing grants for electric car buyers.

Some impacts of climate change are now inevitable and indeed are already happening.

This means that need funding for adaptation to climate change. However, climate finance from rich countries has so far heavily prioritized mitigation, with 63% of all climate-related finance globally flowing to renewable energy.

Planning for a just transition instead means that the costs of climate action should not be borne by those who have done least to cause the problem, including workers, frontline communities in the global south, and black and Indigenous communities.

.If there was a moment of true emergency in the fight to preserve our climate, it is now.  Not to be derailed by false solutions and dangerous delusions.

The cost of failure is astronomical.  It translates into many premature deaths, more mass migration, major economic losses, large swaths of unlivable land, and violent conflict over resources and food.

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

 

THE BEADY EYE LOOKS: FORWARD TO THE WORLD CLIMATE CHANGE GATERING IN SCOTLAND IN NOVEMBER 2021

31 Sunday Jan 2021

Posted by in #whatif.com, 2021. The year for change., Climate Change Summit Scotland 2021, Climate Change., Covid-19 Vaccines., Disaster Capitalism., How to do it., Humanity., Our Common Values., POST COVID-19., Reality., Sustaniability, Technology v Humanity, The common good., The Obvious., The pursuit of profit., The state of the World., The world to day., THE WORLD YOU LIVE IN., We can leave a legacy worthwhile., WHAT IS TRUTH, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE LOOKS: FORWARD TO THE WORLD CLIMATE CHANGE GATERING IN SCOTLAND IN NOVEMBER 2021

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

 

 

(Five-minute read) 



We are coming up to another god-wobbling Climate Change gathering in Scotland which by any account will be A ZOME GATHERING because of COVID-19 on the 1 – 12 November 2021.

This one is the 26th UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26).

A two-week showcase as to why the world is unable to come together to tackle the problems of climate change.  Remember that these conferences started in the 90th. 

chimney

 

This one is likely to include demonstrations of virtual reality technology; showcasing innovation helping to tackle global climate change and probably like the others will archive little or nothing. 

Why? 

Because they produce nonbinding promises without addressing the main problem of how or who is going to finance the changes needed.   

We live in an age in which intersecting crises are being lifted to a global scale, with unseen levels of inequality, environmental degradation, and climate destabilization, as well as new surges in populism, conflict, economic uncertainty, and mounting public health threats.

The coronavirus pandemic may lead to a deeper understanding of the ties that bind us on a global scale., and there are, to a certain degree, parallels that can be drawn between the current COVID-19 pandemic and some of the other contemporary crises our world is facing. All require a global-to-local response and long-term thinking.

All need to be guided by science and need to protect the most vulnerable among us, and all require the political will to make fundamental changes when faced with existential risks. They all need Money. 

It’s rational for an individual country not to drastically reduce greenhouse gases, given most economies are heavily based on energy resources that emit them. Yet, if all nations act that way — indeed, that’s what’s happening — most countries would eventually be worse off due to the cumulative impacts of all our emissions, not to mention the hoarding of covid-19 vaccines.  

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that Covid -19 is real and that Climate Change will wreak havoc on the planet. BOTH ARE ALREADY DOING SO.

Covid-19 has brought the entire world economy to its knees in a matter of weeks during a pandemic that scientists warned us would come.

While enacting policies today to cut greenhouse gas emissions won’t have a discernible impact on global warming for decades, if not centuries. That’s because we have already locked in significant warming due to our historical emissions. Unlike other policies, climate change is cumulative. The longer we wait to address it, the bigger the problem it becomes and the harder it gets to solve, fueling a feedback loop that makes solutions ever more difficult.

Although global emissions were not as high as last year, they still amounted to about 39 billion tonnes of CO2.  Covid-19 has changed this narrative to one that involves avoiding a rebound in emissions. 

The bottom line: Big climate policy would have to offer concrete benefits outside of its impact on emissions — think jobs or energy security — to overcome this time disconnect.

The bottom line: We are the first generation of humans to start paying the price for a warmer world, and we are also the first to face costs as we try to address it.

We’re paying now and later.

  • Cost No. 1: Responding to flooding, heatwaves, and other extreme weather that climate change is often making worse.
  • Cost No. 2: Enacting policies to reduce emissions, which would come in the form of higher fossil-fuel costs today.
  • Cost No. 3 will continue for decades, if not centuries, even in addition to Cost No. 2.
  • This is because of the aforementioned time disconnect: the amount of warming locked in already has also locked in associated costs — which will come in the form of not just money, but also health, lives, and nature losses.


This just might be the world’s greatest collective action problem, which is when rational, self-interested decisions of individuals make the circumstances of the group worse, and vice versa

Imagine getting taxed before you put that money into your fund and then not living long enough to reap the payoffs of your fund. That’s happening with climate change, on a global scale.

Even though climate change presents a slower, more long-term health threat, an equally dramatic and sustained shift in behavior will be needed to prevent irreversible damage.

When we eventually overcome the COVID-19 pandemic, we can hopefully hold on to that sense of shared humanity in order to rebuild our social and economic systems to make them better, more resilient, and compassionate

Joe Biden’s climate plan promises net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, Biden would be pushing 110 years old when he’d have to check (likely from the afterlife) on how his policy did. I’ll be 65. How old will you be?

Essentially all organisms use weather cues to guide their lives, and when these change and fracture everyone takes a hit.

As I have said in previous posts there is only one way to finance the changes.

That is by making a profit for profit sake pay, by placing a World Aid Commission of 0.05% on all activities that are not sustainable. ( See previous posts.)  

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

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE OPEN LETTER TO THE DELEGATES OF THE FORTHCOMING UNITED NATIONS CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE IN GLASGOW: If you thinks they we have a problem with migration today … wait 20 years.

06 Friday Mar 2020

Posted by in Climate Change.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE OPEN LETTER TO THE DELEGATES OF THE FORTHCOMING UNITED NATIONS CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE IN GLASGOW: If you thinks they we have a problem with migration today … wait 20 years.

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

Fifteen-minute read.

Dear Delegate,

Although climate change undoubtedly posed an “existential threat to our world” it is not too late to take decisive action.

So far we had the Cop-out 15 to Cop 25, the Kyoto Protocol in 1997 the Paris Agreement in December 2015 and now the 2020 United Nations climate change conference in Glasgow.

As you know dealing with climate change will require coordinated action by nations around the world.

Up to this point what we have seen are countries and industries trying to gut, block or water down all efforts, in a rearguard manoeuvre that mirrors President Donald Trump’s rollback of climate policy in Washington.

24 million people were displaced by weather-related disasters this year.

As climate change begins to alter patterns of disasters, we can imagine these figures will get worse. Understand how changing weather patterns and disasters will alter patterns of migration. This will be both difficult and almost impossible to predict.

Reduction of carbon emissions has no chance of being reached through a voluntary cap and trade system utilizing the free market system. Why would countries strongly enforce caps and targets on their emissions if it puts them at a competitive disadvantage in the market place?

The fact is that if we are to save the planet from a devastating ecological meltdown, it is going to require an immediate and I mean immediate, reduction in greenhouse gases.

We must abandon the absurd notion that the invisible hand of the free market system will solve the crisis.

Why?

Because a market-driven voluntary system will not work.  

Because they are traded for huge profits. There is no baseline from which true carbon reductions can be measured, verification is lacking. 

Because it is cheaper to pollute and buy credits than it is to change production processes.

It is totally unrealistic to believe that carbon reductions on a large scale can be attained unless mandatory reductions are implemented and a full scale global. 

While rewarding carbon-reducing technologies makes sense we will only be able to take worthwhile actions if they are funded by a self-perpetuating fund with outright non-repayable subsidies. 

However, I don’t have to tell you that when it comes down to the wire as who and how we are going to fund the way forward to tackle fairly any actions the simple answer is that we do not have enough time to haggle about it. 

It can be achieved tomorrow by placing a 0.005% commission on all world activities that seek profit for profit sake. ( See previous posts)

The world stock markets are 99% run by high-frequency algorithms. Exploiting market conditions that can’t be detected by the human eye.

Of course, this begs an important question will such a commission affect the free market and can it be applied worldwide. 

Yes to both. 

It will not be climate change that creates another refugee crisis.

Rather, it will be the attempts to stop this migration that will be creating a crisis.

Climate change will not wait. Neither can we for climate refugees.

Regardless of how fast we cut emissions, we are going to see more and more people on the move and there is no single global agreement that can be signed and ratified to change this fact. 

Most of what you know about climate-linked migration is probably wrong.

We all know that climate change is the unpredictable ingredient in our rapidly changing world – and it’s potential to trigger both violent conflict and mass migration – needs to be considered as an urgent priority for policymakers.

As its effects spread, it will destabilise entire economies and overwhelm poorer countries lacking resources and infrastructure. 

When added to existing social, economic and political tensions, it has the potential to ignite violence and conflict with disastrous consequences.

Poland is highly dependent on polluting coal for power (Pic: Beemwej)
You cannot strike a bargain with Climate. 

The choice faced by politicians and all of us is not about how to prevent climate-linked migration.

That possibility is gone, several decades ago.

There is now a stark choice between two very different options:

One: Trying to stop people from moving—which will lead to something that looks like a crisis—or helping people migrate out of the most badly hit areas.

Two: Is to facilitate climate-linked migration in a legal and organised way.

Support for migrants and refugees is at an all-time low. People are already using migration as a way of adapting climate change, with little or no help.

When migration isn’t illegal there is no need to do it secretly. No need for traffickers and smugglers. And no need for migrants to hide as soon as they arrive.

There is no simple law that could be passed that would “fix” climate-linked migration.

The problem is this won’t stop people moving so we need to start by defining exactly what a climate refugee is.

Droughts, hurricanes, floods and sea-level rise are all forcing people to move but picking out one group of people to call “climate refugees” is very difficult.

WHY?

Political responses to climate-linked migration are complicated, and it’s a field where the answers are often not simple.

Because if climate change plays a role in displacement it becomes difficult to draw the line.

What do we know about the links between climate change and conflict?

Climate-linked migration is very often from rural areas into cities.

So if the seas do rise to the predicted levels and people move within there own countries they will not be refugees climate or otherwise.  

To be a refugee you have to have crossed an international border which is part of the official definition of what makes someone a refugee. But, as the impacts of climate change worsen, more people will want to migrate across borders.

Therefore there is only one course of action and that is to open approved channels into the EU and other world nations in order to determine who is a genuine refugee and who is not. 

Few politicians will risk making bold statements about making provision for more people. Climate change is also a low priority for electorates in developed countries.

This is the climate crisis, not the coronavirus. tomorrow is too late. 

These changes cannot take place tomorrow. They should have been implemented yesterday!

Capitalism caused the problem now it should pay to resolve it.

Climate change is unequivocal, that we are responsible, and that our choices before us matter”.

We were never going to get there in one go unless we spread the cost in a way that is acceptable to one and all.  

Yours Faithfully 

The Beady Eye. 

Footnote: All supportive comments appreciated.

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S; WE ARE ABOUT TO ENTER THE END GAME.

29 Sunday Dec 2019

Posted by in 2019: The Year of Disconnection., Climate Change.

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

 

(Sixteen-minute read) 

WHY?

Because there is no point any longer carry on claiming that we are a victim of world events…Climate change, Artificial intelligence, Capitalist greed etc. 

If Everyone’s Finger–Pointing, Who’s to Blame?

The answer, it seems, is someone else.

We think blaming means we get away with it.

Getaway with what?

If we stop it may become evident that this blame game is getting us nowhere and maybe, we need to look deeper at that word RESPONSIBILITY.

Could it be possible that our choices got us in the mess and our new responsible choices could get us out of the blame game forever?

The issue at hand is a vicious circle. Greed versus Common sense.

It is important that the leadership of countries are responsible for governing but does anyone remember the last time that a government actually took responsibility for their own actions?

No.

Politicians — hostage to the tyranny of short election cycles — instead wooed voters seeking instant gratification, the protection of unsustainable entitlements, and shortcuts to continued prosperity they pander to popularism. 

Its no wonder we use blame like an auto-pilot switch?

At no point do we want to think that our choices may be contributing to what is going on in our life.

The media changed our perception of so many things preventing us from coming to a consensus not only on how to dig ourselves out of this mess but also on how to prevent it from happening again.

All that has been positive is slowly being replaced with only more negative.

And so no goes the endless, useless recriminations.

The blame game, however, is a lot more dangerous than it sounds. This never-ending cycle not only diverts responsibility but distracts from coherent responses.

That has two immediate consequences.

First, it is virtually impossible to generate a sense of shared responsibility that must underpin any sustainable, effective solution.

Second, the temptation increases for each country to turn inward, significantly raising the risk of protectionism.

As the species that have taken over the planet.

The world is looking for bold leadership, and in the absence of it, dysfunction that will make 2019 merely a flesh wound risks is becoming an ever more likely reality.

There is the possibility that our struggle to halt destructive climate change is going to make most of the people around the world very conscious of changes on the planetary level that need to be stopped, and species extinction is in that category. . . .However, unless humanity learns a great deal more about global biodiversity we will soon lose most of the species composing life on Earth.

WHY?

Because we need to do one big thing that people could get together on that would solve the problem and it needs to happen politically, globally in order to fulfil this vision? 

We might have achieved many small victories in a losing war but what is immediately relevant at the present time is our collective inability to act as one. If not what we will see soon—it is on the horizon—is a second great environmental crisis, and that’s a shortage of freshwater.

It’s a shortage of fresh water that is rapidly growing, that’s causing some of the most tragic humanitarian problems . . .  and it’s going to get worse and worse.

We the grownups we have to start somewhere.

The era that we have to create ahead of us is going to have to include action and research in multiplicity.

I mean, lots and lots of people involved in order to keep the whole planet and all the plants and animals in it, in order to understand how the living world works….where life came from, where we came from, and what we need to be preserving in order to make Earth a livable, habitable place—a planet to be our home. 

Billion of us live in our technologic bubble called cities, indifference to what is taking place outside our own worlds thanks to the Smartphone. If that remains true for the next decade what is left won’t be worth saving.

Where to start?

We now face a substantial possibility of seeing a complete collapse of the ecosystem which will have an irreversible impact of human activity.

The slide toward extinction with all our efforts around the world has not slowed, nor will it in the near future. 

Like conservation efforts around the world had consisted of targeted procedures to save a species here or there or to save a habitat here or there.

Rather than point the finger of blame here a few things we could change.

Hope is after all one of the great attributes we are all ushered towards…

Profit-seeking Algorithms. Regulation

Technology leapfrogging.  Transparency.

Currency manipulator. Emerging economies gained a competitive advantage by manipulating their currencies, weakening labour standards, degrading the environment, or engaging in various forms of implicit protectionism.  Unsustainable national policies. 

Consumption.  Ban Media/TV Advertising that is promoting consumption for consumption. 

Multilateral institutions.  The UN are only as strong as our member nations let it be.  When push came to shove, these institutions shie away from their duties, hindered by widespread representation and legitimacy deficits. Remove the Veto.

Bogus blame:  Remove False News from Social media 

All those things together intrinsic, to human instinctive behaviour?  

They could go long way to helping us remain in the game.The End Game

Politicians, of course, will say: “It’s not our fault. They are right as to do not hold them to account. 

Education. Stop educating for the market place. Children have to take out of the classroom and learn where fresh air, fresh water, fresh vegetables, fresh everything comes from. To learn true human instinct are not a Tweet, a Like, a Smartphone, a Virtual game.

And trust me — no one will want to take the blame for that tragedy.

Our evolution now is a competition, greed against all of us. 

Everyone can get it eventually, if they just think.

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

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: THE WORLD HAS YET TO GRASP PROPERLY THE CLIMATE CHANGE PROBLEM.

30 Saturday Nov 2019

Posted by in Climate Change.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: THE WORLD HAS YET TO GRASP PROPERLY THE CLIMATE CHANGE PROBLEM.

Tags

, , , , ,

 

(Two-minute read)

There is no doubt that climate change is a complex subject and is challenging us in ways we’ve never seen before.

Based on what scientists understand, the changes we are seeing today are far more rapid than anything that has occurred in our planet’s history.

How best to depict the climate emergency is down to the media to ensure that the images publish accurately and appropriately convey the climate crisis that we face.

To address Climate Change with or without an agreement is going to cost trillions.

when trying to depict what cannot always be seen.showing the direct impact of environmental issues on people’s daily lives as well as trying to indicate the scale of the impact,the effect of the reporting and how we perceive the risks. to unearth photography beyond the usual keywords of climate change, heatwave and floods.

The problem is:  No one, No country, No government, No Organisation, No economy, wants to pay for it. T

THIS ISSUE IS CRITICAL IF WE ARE TO ACHIEVE ANYTHING WORTHWHILE.

Everyone is, however, paying lip service to the problem.

Delay action will drastically increase the costs of taking action, but no one ever talks about how the funding required can be achieved.

Why?

Because the costs will not be shared evenly.

The trillions have to come from somewhere.

The world’s most powerful institutions are still engaged in a game of lethal procrastination that threatens to speed up global ecological collapse and sow chaos throughout human civilization in the decades to come.

The world’s biggest asset managers remain heavily invested in climate-polluting industries ― and do little if anything to convince those companies to change.

Forceful engagement with the companies in these sectors to hasten their transition to low carbon technologies must occur.

A Bloomberg New Energy Finance chart shows investments in new solar, wind and other non-hydroelectric power projects dropping from 2017 to 2018. (Photo: Bloomberg New Energy Finance)A Bloomberg New Energy Finance chart shows investments in new solar, wind and other non-hydroelectric power projects dropping from 2017 to 2018. (Photo: Bloomberg New Energy Finance)

Clearly, it’s not enough.

At this juncture, to meet the growing demand for green and social investments we need to have a dual focus on maximizing the potential of our current financial instruments, while also creating space for the next wave of innovations for sustainable growth.

We all know that there is already technology that exits, or that are coming on stream to tackle the problem head-on. Not in thirty years from now.

This blog as I am sure are others have been posting a solution that addresses the fair spreading of the costs worldwide. 

( See: 0.05% World Aid commission)

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

 

 

.