Why solving climate change requires we address the inhibiting conundrum ...
I see many discussions on climate change mainly focused on climate damages being observed but I don't see a realistic discussion that addresses the conundrum in play that is prohibiting the solution
The topic of climate change is often in our political discourse with varying viewpoints as to whether this is a danger to the planet or not.
It’s understandable that many in the public are finding it difficult to understand the ‘science’ behind climate change due to the complexity of the various things involved.
The observed changes we are witnessing, however, in our global climate need to be understood if we’re to find the ‘economic drivers’ in play in order to obtain a long-term sustainable solution.
I’ve written several Substack posts on the topic and wish in this post to contrast them to issues being brought forth in our political discourse which are facing the ‘unknown’ conundrum. In other words, support of various policies that don’t address the specific reasons why climate is changing and yet could be ‘driving’ more change.
I hope to present in understandable terms why it’s vital climate change activists see the complete picture and understand the public’s role in finding a workable solution.
If you’re seeking a location where the ‘science’ of climate change is being debated, I would recommend the following website:
The issues ‘pro and con’ to climate change are debated by scientists and provide significant insights especially to the most common questions including graphs of the data under consideration which is driving changes.
To begin this post, I would recommend reviewing the topic as presented in Wikipedia.
Their presentation gives a broad overview of the topic including its definition as well as the primary economic driver of burning fossil fuels which increases CO2, a greenhouse gas, to higher concentrations in the atmosphere.
And it’s the burning of fossil fuels that creates the conundrum which I’ll discuss below.
It should be noted that all global economic activity is based on global energy consumption which is driven by various energy sources.
I’ve presented in my previous Substack posts various thoughts on various types of energy development sources used in our economy, and I’ll include one here that provides several of my posts to avoid repetition here in this post.
There are ‘pros and cons’ as to what type of energy sources we use but sufficient to say at present, the predominate sources are from fossil fuels.
Currently, our global economy is based approximately on 80% of these types of fuels (petroleum (oil), natural gas, and coal).
These are combusted to generate heat which drives various types of equipment from boilers used to generate steam for electricity generation, the natural gas used in our heating systems in our buildings and what produces the ability of engines in our transportation vehicles to provide the power to move them.
The combustion, however, creates in the exhaust of these systems, CO2 which as noted previously, is a greenhouse gas.
The burning of these fuels introduces the climate change conundrum which can be described simply as burning more fuel creates more CO2.
And the increasing fossil fuel consumption today is driven by global population growth to create the additional economic activity if you will, to satisfy the needs of people needing this energy to produce additional food production, job creation, and to excavate the natural resources used in our everyday lives.
I discussed this in this post below focusing on US usage of energy consumption introducing the conundrum of increasing economic output with mostly nonrenewable fossil fuels.
Why don't we recognize the climate change conundrum with respect to economic growth?
I raise in this post many of the questions that will need to be answered for a long-term sustainable solution addressing climate change.
In any event, the leadership, influencers, and journalists interested in the climate change debate will find the post informative addressing many of the points in this post.
To summarize, many of those wishing to address climate change are not associating the increased usage of energy consumption as the primary economic driver increasing the observed consequences. Nor do they recognize that an increasing global population is the primary driver of the need for more energy consumption.
Many advocates who are asserting that we need to spend additional government funding to address climate change are nevertheless not addressing the primary economic drivers.
My post here discusses this issue and while repeating much of the discussion in this post.
In conclusion, let me restate the conundrum facing us to solve climate change.
Addressing the need to solve climate change requires that ‘all’ economic drivers in play be understood.
Increasing global economic activity without understanding the energy being used for same will not produce the desired outcome sought by climate change activists.
Addressing the demand for more energy consumption from a growing global population has yet to be introduced into the political discourse.
I understand the reluctance to address the global population issue which is a complete political discourse discussion worthy of its own including the primary focus of my Substack blog being sustainable prosperity.
I have tried in the Substack post below to describe the eventual actions necessary to inform the public of their role in the climate change issue which involves recognizing the existing cultural folklore, religious beliefs, and various ideologies are creating the conundrum of addressing climate change.
My hope is that this post helps influencers, leadership, and journalists see the climate change issue involves a much larger perspective than is currently being presented in our political discourse.
I understand the changes required are not going to be easily implemented until the global public understands the climate change issue in its entirety.
In conclusion, I hope this post provides a sufficient introduction to the climate change conundrum facing us and provides the public with the confidence that we can address this issue in a manner which produces the long-term result protecting all future global economic activity.
I want to thank the climate scientists, energy engineers, and sustainability economists that have acquired the knowledge necessary to protect our future.
Thanks for your time. Comments and suggestions can be made to either my Bluesky or X (formerly Twitter) social media platforms which are greatly appreciated.
Note: the majority of links presented in this post not bolded are from Wikipedia and other websites if the reader wishes to explore the terms in greater depth to which I also recommend you have software that protects you from high-risk websites. Bolded links are my other previous Substack blog posts.