[quote]pushharder wrote:
OK Bert, let’s say you are 100% correct in all you’ve posted here on this thread. What now?[/quote]
Honestly, I don’t have a comprehensive plan of action. I don’t really subscribe to the whole “impending crisis bearing down on our asses” school of thought. I think the changes that are occurring are happening at a slower rate than many predicted they would in the past, which is at least partially due to some of the measures enacted to slow such changes down. I simply think that we need to be aware that these changes ARE occurring and that there are certain things we can do to our infrastructure and so on to prepare for further future changes.
I think some of these things include shoring up many of the coastal areas susceptible to erosion as ocean levels continue to rise. I think that’s something that is better done sooner than later. I think perhaps it would be wise to somehow discourage coastal housing developments in these areas as well. That could happen via legislation, closing off certain areas to future residential or commercial development, jacking insurance rates way up or whatever. I don’t know what the best pathway is, but I certainly don’t think it is that great of an idea to continue building in vulnerable areas. The same holds true for places like New Orleans or Sacramento, which are major cities sitting below sea level whose levees are in dire need of repairs or replacements.
I also think that the same holds true for places in areas that are already extremely warm, like Arizona or New Mexico, and are also in places where water is not plentiful at all. There are also changes to the sorts of crops that we grow across the country that could alleviate future problems. Like it or not, and I certainly don’t like it, but govt subsidies of certain crops are a reality right now. Perhaps the govt could start subsidizing crops that grow better in drier, warmer areas. Rice would be a crop that I think we should get away from a little bit. It requires a TON of water to grow.
I personally think this next scenario might be a bit far-fetched, but I think it’s still smart to have some sort of plan if it DOES happen in the future. At some point, whether it’s here or on another continent, climate change will lead to mass migrations. It’s happened before all throughout the history of each continent on this planet to varying degrees. Well, mass migration poses some very serious human rights/safety issues as well major national security issues. For the sake of argument, let’s simply assume that these migrations will generally be in a northern direction, at least in the northern hemisphere. Are we ready as a country to handle massive migrations of people from Mexico, Central and South America into Northern America? Is Canada ready for a potential migration of millions of Americans into its country? It’s hard to plan for something like that if we are still denying that the changes that could force that to happen are being denied.
There are more things that could be done. These are just some of the things that have come to mind in the last 15 minutes. If I were to brood on it more I’m sure there are other things we could do.
Actually, from a pure business standpoint there is another thing we could do. I really don’t know how China feels about this issue in relation to where this country is on the issue, but I think it’s safe to say that most of the developed world is at least partially onboard with the whole climate change thing. Green technologies are being utilized all around the world more than in recent memory, that’s for sure.
Even if the 3% is entirely correct, what would it hurt for the U.S. to be the unquestioned industry leader when it comes to “green” technology? If other countries are going to be using this technology, regardless of whether or not it does anything, shouldn’t the U.S. try to position itself to be the one making money off of manufacturing and selling it? If there was a huge market for snake oil, why wouldn’t you want to sell snake oil?
