Hello folks, Today we're taking a moment off our usual tech business topics, and mark this day as Thousands of bloggers from around the world are joining together this Thursday, September 27th with a single message: Stop Abuse!
I've chose to focus on the Abuse on the Environment that's been happening increasingly all around our globe for the past few decades.
With the disturbing increase of Global Warming, which we witness its effects every day, all around us.
The broad agreement among climate scientists that global temperatures will continue to increase has led nations, states, corporations and individuals to implement actions to try to curtail global warming or adjust to it. Many environmental groups encourage action against global warming, often by the consumer, but also by community and regional organizations. There has also been business action on climate change, including efforts at increased energy efficiency and (still limited) moves to alternative fuels. One important innovation has been the development of greenhouse gas emissions trading through which companies, in conjunction with government, agree to cap their emissions or to purchase credits from those below their allowances.
The world's primary international agreement on combating global warming is the Kyoto Protocol, an amendment to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), negotiated in 1997. The Protocol now covers more than 160 countries globally and over 55% of global greenhouse gas emissions.
Only the United States (historically the world's largest greenhouse gas emitter), Australia, and Kazakhstan have not ratified the treaty. In the absence of clear concerted action by the U.S. Federal government, various state, local, and regional governments have begun their own initiatives to indicate support and compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, on a local basis. For example, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) is a state-level emissions capping and trading program involving eight Northeastern states, which was founded on December 20, 2005.
Image from Global Warming Art
Some economists have tried to estimate the aggregate net economic costs of damages from climate change across the globe. Such estimates have so far failed to reach conclusive findings; in a survey of 100 estimates, the values ran from US$-10 per tonne of carbon (tC) (US$-3 per tonne of carbon dioxide) up to US$350/tC (US$95 per tonne of carbon dioxide), with a mean of US$43 per tonne of carbon (US$12 per tonne of carbon dioxide). One widely-publicized report on potential economic impact is the Stern Review; it suggests that extreme weather might reduce global gross domestic product by up to 1%, and that in a worst case scenario global per capita consumption could fall 20%. The report's methodology, advocacy and conclusions have been criticized by many economists, primarily around the Review's assumptions of discounting and its choices of scenarios, while others have supported the general attempt to quantify economic risk, even if not the specific numbers.
(Source:Wikipedia)
I've recently watched Al Gore's An Inconvenient True, and I must say it really is a must see documentary for anyone, to understand just how critical and dangerous the abuse on the planet is, and if we won't act hurry and wake up it soon may just be too late.









0 comments:
Post a Comment