We're just trying to slow it down. But that will make a huge difference.
If we do nothing, it won't be a Hollywood style disaster. Gradually coastal areas will flood and agriculture will be damaged. But it will be very bad. Rich countries will cope, but it will take huge amounts of money. In poor countries many people will die of starvation, but not all of them.
But we can avoid the worst of that by slowing it down. Here's a practical and affordable plan, worked out by hundreds of scientists and economists from all over the world working together.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,481085,00.html
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM040507.pdf
2007-10-08 16:10:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by Bob 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
We can slow it down and need to be doing that (though we're not doing enough about it, we should have at least 30 nuclear power plants under construction if we actually want to have a chance at slowing it).
Stopping it would mean reducing emissions to almost nothing which we can't do right now but the technology needed for that is near term (synthetic fuels will be needed for where you can't put a nuclear reactor). The increase in our CO2 emissions has resulted in the natural removal of CO2 increasing as well (though not by much) so a slight increase in CO2 emissions compared to before the industrial age would probably be needed to prevent us from accidentally going into another ice age.
The ultimate solution though would be to reverse global warming completely and that could best be done by taking excess carbon dioxide out of the air and burying it in old oil wells.
As for those who want to stop it, the fossil fuel industry along with the people who work there know full well that stopping global warming would hurt them so they do what they can to stop it including funding psuedoscientists to claim it isn't happening or front groups to propose inadequate alternatives so as to divert attention away from nuclear fission which actually could replace coal.
2007-10-08 18:05:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by bestonnet_00 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
For decades, environmentalism has been the Left's best excuse for increasing government control over our actions in ways both large and small. It's for Mother Earth! It's for the children! It's for the whales! But until now, the doomsday-scenario environmental scares they've trumped up haven't been large enough to give the sinister prize they want most of all: total control of American politics, economic activity, and even individual behavior. With global warming, however, greenhouse gasbags can argue that auto emissions in Ohio threaten people in Paris, and that only global government can tackle such problems. National sovereignty? Democracy? Forget it: global warming has now brought the Left closer to global government, statism, and the eradication of individual rights than it has ever been before.
2016-05-19 03:20:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not by current methods. Therefore, we are all lost. Most importantly, it doesn't matter about the disbielvers of Global Burning. Let them disbielve all they want. Firstly, their numbers grow smaller each day, and secondly, there is already enough believers that some people of honor will at least attempt a Global Burning fix, eventually. Even if it means WAR. Ha, you thought terrorist were real. Wait till humanity feels its certain and irreversible destruction. You won't need to look at Irag and Iran for blood and guts, it will be even worse here than it is now, that's for Katrina sure. And in the meantime, anything they can do before they blow this dump to make you not worry about Global Burning, they will do it, including Irag and Iran, etc. etc. etc. Liars and murderers, every one.
2007-10-08 16:07:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by constapato #2 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yes, and I am very proud to answer in the affirmative. To say otherwise would certainly mean surrendering our lives and the lives of our love ones, not only of this generation but liewise the future generations as well.
Through concerted and united effort world wide, we can all stop global warming which affects all of us negatively.
Indeed, there is a need to promote Environment Friendly materials and practices, report to the authorities ill - practices against and hurting our much precious Environment and petition our respective governments to pursue a robust and healthy Environment.
2007-10-08 17:37:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by Ramy 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
What? Do you want to freeze into ice?
Global warming is necessary to sustain life on this planet.
2007-10-10 02:19:57
·
answer #6
·
answered by fyzer 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Slow it down.
We need to slow it down so that nobody who is alive today will die because of it. That's what it's really about--self-preservation. Everything that isn't about money is about that.
2007-10-08 15:48:44
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
No most all scientist that we are suppose to listen to aggree
That it cant be stopped maybe slowed down a little so we can trade Carbon offsets a little bit longer.
2007-10-08 17:47:28
·
answer #8
·
answered by vladoviking 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
i dont know but the scientists said in 25-50 years the world will be a very diferent place because of the rising seas.
2007-10-08 15:44:58
·
answer #9
·
answered by tracy 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
we could slow it down
MAYBE
but it is very doubtful,
Like God said to Moses ,
take these two tablets
and if that does not work
call me in the morning
it would mean all of Humanity co operating and becoming green ,
Can you see that happening??????
here is how you become green
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=As0685Gw713_Zly_EMgToWwS.Rd.;_ylv=3?qid=20071008224656AAYJGXa
2007-10-08 19:08:06
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋