The Economist has an article speculating about climate change creating border conflicts. What do you think? We already have our first phase of climate change refugees and more to come.
This is the single greatest threat and opportunity mankind has to prove the Prisoner's Dilemma is more than a game.
All of mankind - not to mention other species - are all in this together. What are you thoughts on if we are wise enough to conserve and preserve instead of consume and presume things will be alright?
UPDATE: THX TO A TIP FROM ANDREW MCINTYRE HERE IS A LINK TO A VIDEO OF GWYNN DYER ON TVO'S BIG IDEAS TALKING ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE REFUGEES ADN OTHER MATTERS.
I needed more space to adequately address my thoughts on this, so here I am in the comments! Pardon me while I explain my point of view.
ReplyDeleteLook no further than Gwynne Dyer for an extremely lucid presentation of the evidence on the case for climate change to be a hugely destabilizing global security threat. Border wars? Mass Starvation? Nuclear war? And the global balance of security is already precarious at best.
On TVO's Big Ideas (video link: http;//bit.ly/13Bq5q) he "scenario-mongers" through the nightmares that have a reasonable shot of coming true, particularly if we do not radically change the way our economies and energy systems function.
Climate change is real and is the biggest post Cold War security threat in the world. Much bigger than terrorism.
That's not ideology either. 99% of scientists agree on the exitence of man made climate change and the crucial relationship with carbon dioxide (along with other greenhouse gases) and Global temperatures. The reason there is any debate about this at all is the result of massively well funded disinformation campaitgns - propadanga - challeging the scientisfic evidence with psuedo-science and strawmen.
The fact that North West passage in arctic is open again this summer: That is evidence you can see. So are the shrinking glaciers.
So what are the implications for the things that matter, like global food production? The melting glaciers could mean the end of glacier fed streams used for irrigation. ANd that could happen nearly simultaneously. Climate change raises the spectre of northward moving "prime" farmland, away from existing markets, people and infrastructure.
What happens to human civilization if we have massive global crop failures for a few straight years? Millions... Billions...
That's not a pleasant thought.
Worst of all, there is good scientific evidence that there are natural feedback loops being activated, like the melting of the (formerly) permafrost and the warming of the oceans, that are accelerating climate change. We needed to stop putting tons of CO2 in the atmosphere yesterday.
But enough blathering from me. I emplore everyone to listen to Gwynne present the case much more eloquently than I can.