Global warming?

Question

Should international efforts to deal with global warming focus on reducing effects OR causes of global warming? Why?

Answer 1

Causes. The effects--flooding, climate change, crop failures, species extinction--cannot be stopped/reduced except by reducing the cases--primarily the use of fossil fuels.

The real problem in doing this is not technical--we have the technology to cut use of fossil fues by 30-50% now--andmuch more is under development. And--this will create new jobs and industries. WITHOUT forcing people to "do without." The notionthat shifting to alternative enrgy and efficient systems will cost jobs or hurt economic growth is pure scare tactics by the coal/oil companies. They--not the average person--are the ONLY ones who stand to lose. And they--their lobbying and subversion of public officials--it the problem blocking real change.

Answer 2

Some of both.

It's not possible to totally stop global warming without shutting industry down.

And the effects of unreduced global warming would be utterly catastrophic. Details:

http://www.reuters.com/article/scienceNews/idUSL052735320070407
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM6avr07.pdf

So clearly the best strategy is to do what we can rationally do to slow it down, and deal with the remaining effects. Here's a practical and affordable plan:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,481085,00.html
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM040507.pdf

Answer 3

Why not both? Why do so many people say we have to do only one thing? We are not so inept as to only be able to do one thing at a time! I can walk and chew gum at the same time. We can deal with causes AND effects at the same time.

Answer 4

You need to know the cause to reduce the effects successfully.

Answer 5

We should forget it because it's not real.