Addressing ‘Climate Change’ Is Not Enough Or Something

It’s never enough for these folks with the Progressive (nice fascism) leanings, as we learn at the Huffington post

Why Addressing Climate Change Is Not Enough

The celebratory mood accompanying the recent Paris Accord, in which the entire UN membership agreed to hold global temperature increases to no more than 2°C, is quickly dissipating. As the Accord itself acknowledges, there is a “significant gap” between countries’ climate change mitigation pledges and the 2°C goal (not to mention the more aspirational 1.5° C limit). This means that promised reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, even if realized, will be insufficient to stave off major consequences of climate change.

Yet bolder pledges alone will not prevent impending failure because the Paris Accord reproduces the flaws of the Kyoto Protocol. Although reporting is binding, countries face no penalties for missing their targets. Most of all, market-based schemes for emissions reductions enable wealthy countries and corporations to continue “business as usual” by paying low emitters for their pollution rights, ultimately stalling real and equitable progress. As we write, environmental groups across the world are gearing up to challenge these shortcomings.

Interestingly, what the authors discuss are real environmental issues, and do it in a manner which has always annoyed me, linking those real issues with their silly climate change push

Climate change both exacerbates environmental degradation, and results from a growth-at-all-costs economic system that makes certain groups — especially indigenous peoples and marginalized and low-income populations — particularly vulnerable to both climate change and resource scarcity and contamination. Recognizing this fact can help climate-related activism and policymaking do a better job of protecting the planet and all who depend on it.

What are those conditions?

  • Depletion, contamination, and unfair distribution of water (the last is more of the social justice warrior garbage)
  • Threats to air quality (they complain over the use of wood stoves, yet refuse to recognize that their “green energy” and ‘climate change’ pushes increase the use of burning biomass for heat and cooking)
  • Ongoing deforestation and contamination of ecosystems (these are real issues. Why do we need to include this under the bannder of Hotcoldwetdry? The increase in deforestation from the increase in the use of palm oil is a direct result of “green” initiatives)
  • Chemical contamination (again, a very real environmental and health concern. Why the need for putting it under the banner of Hotcoldwetdry? It should stand on its own)
  • Toxic waste disposal (see previous comment)

What do they want to do about it all?

Underpinning all of these problems is an unfair economic system that privileges profits over people’s lives, exploiting the environment and humans alike.

Those concerned about the long-term sustainability and health of humans and the planet need to look beyond reducing greenhouse gas concentrations and adapting to climate change impacts, and recognize the role of the extraction, production, and consumption processes that drive all aspects of environmental degradation and cause tremendous social injustice.

It’s a subtle way of saying that capitalism in any form needs to be eliminated, and replaced with a Progressive social justice system, a command economy driven from the top down, run wholly by Government.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

Leave a Comment

Permalinks


Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!

Send this to a friend