Are governments actually committed to global climate change?

[AvidFisherman]

Riddle me this? There are climate talks going on around the world. People realize that we need to curb our consumption of fossil fuels.

The world is full of capitalistic nations that thrive on consumerism to grow. Correct me if I am wrong but is that not the goal of any country, bring in more money to grow its infrastructure, military and economic interests?

This brings me to my first point, we want to curb our consumption of fossil fuels but fossil fuels drive consumerism. With this oil price slump, Venezuela is in default on its loans, Iran, Canada, Russia, China and the United Arab Emirats are experiencing negative economic effects from the lower gas prices. Countries such as Saudi Arabia have enacted laws not allowing assets to exit the country. How urgent are these countries to curb the consumption of fissile fuels when the lack of consumption, mainly by China, drives down the cost to where several countries are in the state of economic chaos?

Point number 2, we are a consumerist nation, our economy is driven by consuming goods. Many of these goods are derived from non renewable resources, being produced both by using fossil fuels in their ingredients and using fossil fuels for their production. When consumerism slumps the economy goes into a recession. The government spends billions of dollars to get us out of the recession and back to spending our money on goods and services as we are accustomed. Do you see the irony in this? We need to consume less to save our world but economic and political forces are pushing us to consume, spurring along the consumption of non-renewable resources and fossil fuels!

[Bouncer]

Good post. What I'm about to say may seem like a weird comparison but it's a bit of a thought experiment so bear with me.

Lets have a scenario where a bodybuilder is trying to put on size but he is given a deadline at which point his main protein sources will run dry. A scenario where all traditional fish, beef, chicken, pork, venison, eggs, and dairy including whey will be cut off.

You have 2 options in this scenario:

1. You get as big as you can while you still have those protein sources available to you.

2. You get smart and put every effort into prolonging your protein sources and coming up with alternatives.

If you pick option 1 you will thrive in the short term and everything will be great in your world until that inevitable doomsday deadline.

If you pick option 2 you may not have great initial success but desperation drives innovation brother. If you absolutely need something to happen you make it so. You start thinking of nontraditional protein sources like GMO meat, chicken, fish. You start thinking of incomplete protein's that can be combined to make complete proteins. You do what it takes to set yourself up for future success.

It is the responsibility of the individual and in this case the government to do what's needed for long term success. It may cause a recession but imagine the apocalypse when the oil runs out and we haven't properly prepared! There can be no debate here. WE MUST do what we need to do right now even if it means the short term success isn't as great.

[AvidFisherman]

I totally agree but are governments actually doing any major policy changes to address this?

[Bouncer]

I'd say so. Alternative energy is big business. Could they do more, absolutely. Are there greedy fucks who want to get rich now and fuck the future, sure. But the green movement is big.