| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Signs, Portents, and the Weather- |
| Adaptation to global climate change is an essential response to a warming planet |
| 2007-02-09 |
| Temperatures are rising on Earth, which is heating up the debate over global warming and the future of our planet, but what may be needed most to combat global warming is a greater focus on adapting to our changing planet, says a team of science policy experts writing in this week’s Nature magazine. While many consider it taboo, adaptation to global climate change needs to be recognized as just as important as “mitigation,” or cutting back, of greenhouse gases humans pump into Earth’s atmosphere. The science policy experts, writing in the Feb. 8, 2007 issue of Nature, say adapting to the changing climate by building resilient societies and fostering sustainable development would go further in securing a future for humans on a warming planet than just cutting gas emissions. “New ways of thinking about, talking about and acting on climate change are necessary if a changing society is to adapt to a changing climate,” the researchers state in “Lifting the Taboo on Adaptation.” Sarewitz and his colleagues argue that the time to elevate adaptation to the same level of attention and effort as the more popular mitigation of greenhouse gases is now, and that the future of the planet demands realistic actions to help the survival of humans. “The obsession with researching and reducing the human effects on climate has obscured the more important problems of how to build more resilient and sustainable societies, especially in poor regions and countries,” Sarewitz said. “Adaptation has been portrayed as a sort of selling out because it accepts that the future will be different from the present,” Sarewitz added. “Our point is the future will be different from the present no matter what, so to not adapt is to consign millions to death and disruption.” Adaptation is the process by which societies prepare for and minimize the negative effects of a variety of future environmental stresses on society, Sarewitz said. Mitigation is the effort to slow and reduce the negative impacts of climate change by slowing the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. “The key difference is that adaptation is the process by which societies make themselves better able to cope with an uncertain future, whereas mitigation is an effort to control just one aspect of that future by controlling the behavior of the climate,” Sarewitz said. |
| Posted by:DanNY |
| #8 FOX + CNN > HONEYBEES are disappearing. How is Radical Enviro-beloved NATIONAL-GLOBAL ANTI-MATERIALISM/CONSUMERISM [Global Toga] coupled by big Big BIG B-I-G BBBBBIIIIIGGGGGG GUBMINT going to save us since even Big/Hyper-Gubmint needs lotsa revenues + resources, also known as $$$, to save Milyuhns and Zilyuhns of registered voters??? HOW ARE 500,000 - 500M TOGA-WEARERS, WHOM BY DEFINITION DON'T = HAVE NO $$$, PROPERTIES, PLUS NO LONGER USE INDUSTRIAL MACHINES, GONNA STOP THE SUN, STOP THE ASTEROID, ANDOR BUILD HI-TECH SPACE ARKS IN CASE "DA PLAN" DOESN'T WORK; OR THE SUN + ASTEROID(S) REFUSE TO UNILATERALLY SURRENDER??? |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2007-02-09 23:40 |
| #7 Energy consumption is so intricately linked with economic activity that the only ways to substantially reduce energy use and hence Co2 emissions is drastic reductions in either economic activity (i.e. make people a lot poorer) or numbers of people. As a practical matter, the choice is between NORK style socialism and a bird flu pandemic. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2007-02-09 18:50 |
| #6 THEIR survival means that OTHER people have to disappear. Oddly enough, I think the same, you need to vanish while I survive. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2007-02-09 13:28 |
| #5 Something about adapting to one's environment, where have I heard that before? Amazing the number of 'scientists' that have never hear of Darwin, isn't it? |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2007-02-09 11:22 |
| #4 And, yet, I'd bet this "moderate" approach will recieve an eco-fatwa from Gore, "Dr." Heidi Cullen et al. |
| Posted by: BA 2007-02-09 10:57 |
| #3 You cannot get around the fact that these people think, implicitly or explicitly, that there are too many people on the planet, and that THEIR survival means that OTHER people have to disappear. Now there's a thought... |
| Posted by: DanNY 2007-02-09 08:39 |
| #2 Adapt to climate change - when it gets hot, have a cold beer; when it gets cold, Irish coffee; on those 'in-between' days, a glass of sherry is good. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2007-02-09 08:07 |
| #1 These people are partially correct. Tes, there is climate change: the climate theories based on actual facts point to a combination of several cycles related to solar activity. Yes, we need to adapt to the change. "Adapting" is humankind's middle name. HOWEVER, "sustainable" development often means forgoing high tech equipment in favor of low-tech equipment that supports a smaller population. You cannot get around the fact that these people think, implicitly or explicitly, that there are too many people on the planet, and that THEIR survival means that OTHER people have to disappear. |
| Posted by: Ptah 2007-02-09 08:04 |