" We know how to do it. A properly designed global cap and trade scheme is one option. Stiff taxes on the production or sale of carbon-based fuels is another. Or we could simply oblige companies taking carbon out of the ground to arrange for a rising share of what they extract to be buried again. Any of these models could bring down global emissions and stimulate an explosion of investment and innovation in clean and efficient energy systems. But there is no avoiding the unpalatable side-effects: spiralling fuel and energy prices; a write-off of fuel reserves worth many trillions of dollars; and a fierce global squabble about how to share out the fuels we do decide to burn."
that's what we've been doing, and what Cop26 will push forward as their 'new plan'.
We need a ban, to 2030. With probable exceptions giving it a end date of 2040. That's what I expect us to have to do.
And those aerosols, driven by our pollutions and emissions. We are doing a lot of 'geoengineerings' as it is just by existing, and it's getting us evicted. Pollutions bringing with it diverse symptoms as ADHD, allergies and deaths. As well as with your constantly growing displeasure with living. Consuming yourself to death to get your kick.
The corruption and civil unrest you will see won't be located to only those countries first facing global warming, topsoil, water and groundwater. We can use USA again, as a example, or Europe, harder immigration policies, people drowning and we turning a blind eye to it. So it's a lot more complex that any idea of domino bricks moving, you could call it 'organic chaos'.
Those countries hit first will find people migrating, and our own 'Festungs' becoming increasingly hostile to it. It will lead to civil unrest, corruption growing, small arms wars and as a extension major wars.
And the same holds all over the world. Some countries have a very high population density, they will feel it immediately. The more land per person, the more you should be able to move, presuming that it's not only desert. It connects to water and groundwater, to the topsoil and ecology existing. You can look at Brazil and their deforestation as one scary example of doing it wrong. USA and their infra structure as another. But USA still have a lot of land left, just as Russia expects itself to gain a 'bread basket' by its frozen wastes getting heated by global warming. They're wrong.
We will call this ' Averages dissected ', or the difference between global climate models and local realities.
" Ultimately, our crops experience a whole series of temperatures throughout any given year, some of which are harmful. When we take an average, we summarize all of those temperatures in a single number.
Doing so loses some potentially important information that might be quite important for crop growth: Were some of the days during the year exceptionally hot? Did those hot days occur in a row as a heat wave, or were they spread out throughout the year?
To get at those questions, we first build an index of prolonged heat stress by pairing daily temperatures with some simple models of how heat stress might accumulate on abnormally hot days and be relieved on cooler days. Second, using historical data, we examine whether growth in agricultural output declines during years in which that prolonged heat stress index was high more often. Finally, we use that estimated historical relationship together with a suite of climate models to project what future heat waves might mean for agriculture. "
The real problem isn't our industrial revolution, industrial farming, overpopulation and global warming.
It's you, unable and unwilling to grow up. You can't get a democracy, you can't stop polluting, you think you can run into space instead, or to some imaginary Shangri-La, as New Zealand. And that people bother making lists of those countries makes you a joke.