It seems to me that the carbon “debate” currently taking place fails on the most basic level of dealing with any of the facts. It is simply a political poop throwing contest, where the only success factor in either of the protagonists minds is the level of noise they can generate.
The science appears pretty clear, human activity is contributing substantially to climate change, carbon being the primary villain, but nevertheless just one of many, and whilst it is long term in the context of any individual life, it is reasonably clear that we are on borrowed time.
This is not to support either political position, nor to accept or deny the value of a Tax Vs an ETS Vs “Direct Action” but simply to acknowledge the need to take out some insurance, with a very long time frame, so perhaps out great great grand-children will thank us, or perhaps cash in the policy. Either way, they will be better off.
The question currently being asked is “how can we?” and there are many answers, none really addressing the range of challenges in the implementation. Perhaps a better question to start should add one tiny word: “how can we not…..”?
Trackbacks/Pingbacks