|
The wildfires in Australia last year were truly shocking, and if it's a taste of things to come then look out. The trouble is that firstly, it's political suicide to make changes of a significant enough nature to curb CO2 emissions. It would involve the average person in the Western world to accept a sizeable reduction in their quality of living and so the average person (especially the older people) will vote against it. It comes back that old chestnut that we all want others to follow the rules but we, ourselves, want to be exempt from them. Secondly, most politicians are old. They won't be around in 10 or 20 years so they just don't care. The same goes for the elderly voters. "I've worked hard all my life and have earned this huge gas guzzling land cruiser blah blah blah". Thirdly, the kind of change we need involves personal inconvenience. We have spent the last 70 years developing time and labour saving devices and so our energy consumption is now sky high as machines and appliances have replaced human labour, and all these devices consume fuel. To reverse climate change we need to stop using some of these, and if we do so, we'll have to use our own labour to do the jobs instead. A perfect example is a leaf blower. Does anyone actually need one of these? Prior to their invention, a rake was used. But instead of 10 minutes on your leaf blower, you may need to spend 30 minutes outside with a rake and repetitive movements. Most people have heating in their homes. Here in NZ last winter a report came out saying that everyone should be able to live in a home where all they need to wear in winter is a tee shirt. That wearing jumpers was in some way demeaning them and sentencing them to a life of poverty. How ridiculous is that? People will have to invest in a jumper and then turn down their thermostat to save the planet. Will they like it? NO. Will it inconvenience them? YES. I have two friends who both keep their homes at 26 degrees (79 F) all through the winter. One of these houses is 375 sq m (4036 sq feet). Just think of the energy consumption to do that. They both do it because they like to wear shorts and tee shirts at home. Fourthly, keeping a good quality of life with all the modern conveniences whilst still being green is incredibly expensive to do and so it's out of the reach of about 80% of the population. Unless governments stump up the cash for the average family to make these changes, they are either going to be condemed to live in third world conditions or stick with what they've got. i know which one I'd pick in that situation. We are all doomed because no politician will ever mandate the kind of changes required to make a difference.
-------------
Those who got it wrong, for whatever reason, may feel defensive and retrench into a position that doesn’t accord with the facts.
|