Saturday, September 24, 2005
Our idea was better, so we should all die
Michael Graf is in another kind of denial.
Environmental leaders have stressed that "adaptation" to a changing climate is not a real solution to the problem because the resulting global economic and social disruption will overwhelm our capacity to respond.
Which is why we should "adapt" so that we can respond.
Instead of spending a trillion dollars on dams and levees, how about some real funding for alternative-energy research?
That'd be great. But, unfortunately, it also is not a real solution to the problem, because using alternative energy isn't going to magically make the carbon dioxide in the air go away. Even if we instantaneously shifted to a fully solar-powered society, global warming would continue. Which means that we have to adapt anyway.
The real question becomes: since we'll be adapting regardless of what we do, can we justify huge investments into environmental regulation and the like in order to cause rather limited change?
. . .
|
. . .
|
