[ad_1]
The only thing we can say for sure about the future is that it’s going to get even hotter. Humanity is far from achieving zero carbon emissions. This means that even if every government on earth did everything in its power to combat climate change tomorrow, temperatures would continue to rise for many years.
This is often interpreted to mean that the future will necessarily be worse for humanity than the present. Major publications casually refer to the “climate apocalypse.” People are seriously debating the morality of bringing children into the world.letters from young readers new york times The ethics column captures this sentiment well. “We must fully acknowledge that children will have to cope with a reduced quality of life due to the climate crisis and its many knock-on effects, including increased natural disasters, food shortages, and social distancing. Is it selfish to be aware of inequality and insecurity?”
This attitude is understandable, that a world with 1.7 degrees Celsius of warming would be worse than a world with 1.6 degrees Celsius, and even worse than a world with 1.5 degrees Celsius. But that’s wrong. It is by no means certain that children’s quality of life will decline, as global warming is not the only driver of change. Of course, humanity would be far better off without climate change than with it, but that doesn’t mean we’re doomed to a dire future. Even in a warming world, we still have the power to make a difference.
Since the Industrial Revolution, the world has warmed by about 1.3 degrees Celsius, most of which has occurred in the past 50 years. During the same period, most people’s lives improved. Global warming may have slowed the progress, but it hasn’t stopped it. Child mortality rates have plummeted. The risk of a mother dying during childbirth is much lower. people live longer. They are usually fed a better diet. More people will have access to clean water, sanitation, electricity and clean fuel for cooking. Most children now have the opportunity to attend school. This progress has been highly unequal. In some of the most insecure regions, infant mortality rates are 20 times higher than in rich countries. But children’s chances are improving across the board, with rates falling by two-thirds since 1990, even in low-income countries.
This progress has occurred despite climate change, not because of it. Humanity’s ability to prepare for, adapt to, and mitigate risk exceeds the temperature of a mountain climb. Crop yields around the world would have been higher without climate change, but they are still increasing dramatically. Famines, once common, have become much rarer as a result of political change, decolonization, and vast increases in agricultural productivity. The number of deaths from disasters is much lower than in the past. This is not because climate change is making these disasters worse, but because it is making us more resilient to them. Although the malaria situation is worsening in some regions, deaths are decreasing due to increased access to bed nets, antimalarial drugs, and other tools. In a world without climate change, these would be even better. But they are still improving.
The question is whether this progress will continue.Some people deny the idea that Any The future could be better in a warmer world. It’s all downhill towards an inevitable collapse. (In one recent global survey, a majority of young people said they agreed with the statement, “Humanity is doomed.”) Some argue that humanity’s continued progress is inevitable. Yes, just think about how much has been accomplished in the past century.
Both views are too simplistic. Those who extrapolate past progress to future success are making big assumptions. Since we have already experienced a warming of 1.3 degrees Celsius, he might further imagine that a warming of 0.7 degrees Celsius would not be as severe. The problem is that the effects of climate change are not necessarily linear. The impact at 2 degrees is more than double that at 1 degree, making it more likely to reach an irreversible tipping point. However, the other extreme idea that global warming will make life even slightly worse is also wrong.that intention The effects of climate change are becoming more severe, which is why we must fight with each increase, but the ultimate impact on human lives will depend on how we respond. . Human progress may continue in a slightly warmer world.
To be clear, none of this is to say that we should just accept global warming. We may be able to cope with a 1.7, 1.8 or 1.9 degree rise in temperature, but we can’t keep up with a 3 degree rise in temperature. We desperately need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and keep temperatures as low as possible. Although the current trajectory looks bleak, it is improving. We are in a better direction than we were a decade ago, but the cost of low-carbon energy is still falling.
We also need to protect ourselves from the harm we know is coming. We are in a race against a warming climate, and as its effects accelerate, we need to run faster than ever before. For example, heat stress can reduce crop yields by 30% in some regions and increase global hunger. But steps can be taken to combat it, such as developing drought- and temperature-sensitive crops, improving access to irrigation, and protecting against pests. Yields have doubled, tripled, or more in many parts of the world over the past 50 years, but with the right tools you can still close large yield gaps.
Or consider potentially more severe disasters such as floods, droughts, and coastal storms. If the world warms without other changes, deaths are expected to rise. However, by improving early warning systems, building protection infrastructure, improving recovery responses and lifting people out of poverty, it is possible to reduce the human cost even when disasters worsen. Similarly, rising temperatures may increase the prevalence of malaria. However, if prevention and treatment measures can be accelerated, the number of deaths could continue to decline. Even better, his two vaccines to fight malaria now exist and could potentially save tens of thousands of children each year if distribution obstacles are overcome. These innovations have the potential to outweigh the increased burden of global warming.
This is not easy. It will require investment and adjustment. But that’s why the message “we are all doomed” is so useless. The impacts of climate change will not be evenly distributed, and to imply otherwise is to distract attention from where it is needed most. A world where exists. average People will be better off, but it is unacceptable that hundreds of millions of the poorest people will be left behind. Climate change could create even greater inequality as the wealthy buy the damage.
As an environmental scientist, I will never deny that climate change will have serious, perhaps devastating, effects. Nor does it mean that we can’t simply adapt our ways to deal with any level of global warming. The world urgently needs deep emissions cuts to avoid the worst-case scenario. What I’m saying is that even in a world with 1.8 degrees of warming, he could be better off today than in a world with 1.3 degrees of warming. It’s up to us to build a better future.
[ad_2]
Source link
