Do you think that it is the people or the Governments who should take initiatives to reverse global warming?

Question

I don't think the people of any country in an individual position can do some thing.

A great fuss is being created by some World's polititions, like Al Gore, about the global warming, while they themselves were holding the very prominent positions in their Governments. They could get legislations moved to take some remedial measures in a bid, if not to reverse, but to get hold on further incidents of global warming. They could also move the UN to stress upon the World's Governments to take appropriate remedial steps to educate their people not to resort to the acts of enhancements in global warming. Even now I think, Mr. Al Gore might have raised such a question just to improve his own existing book on global warming than to do any good to the public. .

The Governments cannot afford to discoutrage industrialization and permits the industries, which produces pollution, as the same are the revenue generation resources for them.

So, why such Hullabaloo by these politicians?

Answer 1

I would say you are correct in that individuals can not solve the problem of reversing global warming. That is a job for a government to regulate.

But the government will only go so far being that a good number of their (MLAs, and MPs) campaign and party contributors are also the individuals and corporations who are investing the huge sums that drive our industries.

A political party needs money to operate, and they need money to win elections. And by putting a foot down, they're essentially biting the hand that feeds them.

And that still would not prove to be effective. The industries would have no problem setting up operations in developing countries that have little or no environmental regulations. Especially if it allows them to continue manufacturing and refining using older, and cheaper (environmentally damaging) methods.

I think the only way we can solve this problem, is by a calculated agenda. Here is a simplified theory of mine:

1: Educate developing countries on global warming, and environment protection.

2: Influence their environment protection laws. This can be done with trade agreements, money, lucrative industry contracts.

3: Tighten existing laws at home to prevent companies from migrating their operations to countries deemed non-environmentally friendly.

4: Tighten our environmental protection laws.

5: Subsidize and promote renewable energy, and clean burning fuels for our consumers to make the changeover. This will help comfort the industry in their changeover.

If you are looking for examples of some Canadian companies who are working towards clean fuel, and clean renewable energy, look at the following links...

WESTERN GEOPOWER CORP (http://www.geopower.ca/)
Ticker: http://finance.yahoo.com/q?d=t&s=WGP.V
Specializing in Geothermal Power. They have leases in B.C. which should be producing geothermal electricity probably within the next 12 months.

NEVADA GEOTHERMAL POWER INC.(http://www.nevadageothermal.com/s/Home.asp)
Ticker: http://finance.yahoo.com/q?d=t&s=NGP.V
Another grothermal company operating in the Blue Mountain, and Pumpernickel, Nevada area.

Zongshen PEM Power Systems (http://www.zongshenpem.com/)
Ticker: http://finance.yahoo.com/q?d=t&s=ZPP.V
Zongshen are fuel cell experts. This technology is eventually going to be powering our vehicles, cell phones, laptops, and everything you can imagine.

But also, you can not forget solar, tide, and wind energy as your alternatives. One thing is certain though, and that is as these new, superior technologies emerge, and develop, their costs are going to make it less favorable of an option.

Our governments need to support it to allow it to flourish, and not be swept under the rug by our industries simply because it is too costly to make the transition.

Answer 2

OK first off, I think the responsibility is for SOMEONE to make people aware that Global warming is happening..In this instance it's Al Gore making his plea to the masses, I've been doing this work for a long time but I'm one woman in San Diego telling people things they don't want to hear. I believe that when people know what is the right thing to do, they do it... That's been the case through the ages. You ask why Gore didn't do this when he was a "polititions" well he did, but people tried to make it a political thing then too. If you recognized global warming you were a fuzzy headed tree hugging democrat; Now, in your view, when he's not a "polititions" he's trying to hawk a book... OK see a common thread here? At every avenue anyone who makes a valid point for this is waylaid, because somehow this became ENVIRONMENT = LIBERALS **AND** CONSERVATIVE = MAKE FUN OF LIBERALS. I was a dyed in the wool republican until the environmental issues got out of hand and I realized that we were going to allow this Earth to perish because of our party alignment? And now you want us to take this to the UN? What would the UN do? Plead to countries that What, actually no I give up this is an impossible thread...The UN... That's cute, if it wasn't so bad.....it would be cute...

Answer 3

GLOBAL WARMING/THE ENVIRONMENT IN GENERAL

Any and I mean any environmental cause or approach must be grassroots in nature. Having PhD's talk about global warming and having those representing industry interests debunk these present theories is a high level and almost an entirely futile effort. Don't get me wrong, it is great that someone with Al Gore's connections and exposure is getting the word out. However, people are people they want to see results.

Yes, the expression is now trite but still true, "Thing Globally, Act Locally". Watching the sky over a city, town or even a more rural area become darkened by smog has local impact, people take note and actually see A PROBLEM. A problem that can measured in terms of air quality or perhaps an AIR QUALITY HEALTH INDEX like the one that the provincial government in Ontario, Canada is in the process of implementing. You can measure results (however small) in terms of air quality and the affect it has on the health care system (those with breathing problems, doctor's visits, etc). It certainly speaks to the advantage of a UNIVERSAL health care system (however, actually implemented) as it actually makes sense to improve the environment as it keeps people healthy (a humanitarian cause) and when health care it publicly funded it affects the public coffers when people become ill therefore it even makes better financial sense to keep the environment a top priority.

Plus any approach must be entire with a complete overall plan (the big picture). Including recycling initiatives, energy solutions (alternatives/renewables can now present a real potential financial threat to the big oil companies and even power companies...), government involvement at all levels, public transit, greener vehicles in general (Hybrid, Hydrogen, Conventional electric, bio-diesel, ethanol), conservation in all energy arenas, ETC!

Economic viability is the real sell as many of these solutions are just that economically sensible (ensuring we look at the entire picture). Yes as more people use solar, wind and other renewable energy sources the cheaper the technology will get. Two of the newest billionaires have earned a large portion through renewables Solar (India I believe) and Wind (China I believe). Yes in many ways developing nations and economies will be the first and early adopters of such renewable tech as they are just building much of their infrastructure.

So what do we all need to do? GET INVOLVED ! Contact your local government about improving your recycling program, contact provincial/state/federal government about the adopting of these new technologies (renewables such as solar/wind), buy gas with ethanol in it and demand it, use and demand bio diesel, buy products with less packaging and demand manufacturers to reduce packaging and to offer a price break as a result. More ECONOMIC VIABILITY! After all energy diversity just like economic diversity is the safest and best bet for good long term results and return on investment.

Joe...


KEEP IT UP MR. GORE THE POLAR BEARS NEED YOU FIRST **GRIN**.

Answer 4

Global warming cannot be reversed! It will continue to change even if we stop contributing to it. It has changed in the past without any help from us. It is a natural process that will probably not result in our death as a species. The problem is that with our growing population and the new weather patterns, we will have to find ways to feed everyone no matter what happens with the weather, and therefore, the climate. Climate is weather over time. Pollution is something to worry about in the future. Not only does it contribute to atmospheric gasses that contribute to climate change, it also poisons water, soil, and people. People who pollute need to do so in a responsible manner. Is that an unreasonable thing to say?

Answer 5

I think both people and government are human and global warming is common problem for all living beings. The global warming is a kind of natural process which happen in each era. But global warming now we are facing is not a nature process only. It is created by human activities. Though it cann't be reversed we can do some works to slow down its speed. I know that UN is working in the project in which they create artificial ozone but I don't think this can work. But we common people can stop use of things which create CFC. This can work.

Answer 6

I believe that it must be a collaboration between government and individuals. Business must take the incentive to pollute less to help the problem, but since car emissions contribute much to global warming, individuals can also play their par. Legislating social conscience seldom works, but creating a more expensive method for polluting while perhaps subsidizing conservative methods might make a real difference in the industrial nations.

Answer 7

First you have to get the people to believe, then , to care.These politicians can not just say it is so and than make the world follow. There has to be proof, which takes years itself. There has to be reason and cause. And you cant (according to our law,s, that we voted in) just point fingers and accuse. Big money corps will spend millions fighting enviormental issues because of the losses they take implementing them. There has to be a bill put to vote. . And than , that is only the beginning. I'm sure Gore would just love to say, "OK all you morons, you re killing our planet, and its got to stop. From this day on you will do it my way or suffer great consequences." But that is not the way it works in our country or our world. It is not up to one or the other but to all who live and breathe on this planet.

Answer 8

It is without question that all corporations and all governments are the only ones that can handle an issue of this magnitude.If the word does not come together on this issue than mankind Will fail as a whole. This will be our ultimate test.

Answer 9

It's everyones problem so i think both the people and the government should by working together

Answer 10

Not either/or; but both. It's going to take you me and the good Lord all working overtime at this point to bring forth any noticably change.