Many people have been following the global warming (climate change) environmental issue since James Hansen brought it to the attention of Congress in 1988. About 200 nations then formed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1992 which developed the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. The goal was to decide the maximum global increase in temperature by 2050. But nobody wanted to wait until 2050 to determine how well the program was going, so they set a 15-year target of reducing emissions 5% by 2012. Instead of reducing emissions in 15years, they increased by 58%.
James Hansen stated that the carbon dioxide concentration historically was at about 287 parts per million (ppm) for centuries, but it was starting to increase. He indicated that if it went over 350 ppm we would be in trouble. In 2024, the carbon dioxide concentration increased to 423 ppm.
As extreme floods, fires and droughts intensify due to climate change, a new economy centered on adaptation and resilience is rapidly taking shape. Investors are increasingly drawn to this sector, which offers one of the most compelling and inevitable opportunities, as traditional risks — like inflation or interest rates — become less predictable than those posed by weather. Major financial institutions, including JPMorgan Chase and Singapore’s GIC, highlight a significant under allocation of capital to adaptation, despite projections that the market could reach $1.3 trillion by 2030.
On the other hand, there was a recent report from the Energy Department that challenged the wide-spread belief that greenhouse gas emission poses a serious threat to the nation. There is a disconnect between public perceptions of climate change and climate science. This was reported in a recent issue of the Wall Street Journal stating that Energy Secretary Chris Wright commissioned an independent assessment to provide clearer insights into what’s known and not about the changing climate. Some of the report’s key findings were:
- Elevated carbon dioxide levels enhance plant growth.
- Complex climate models provide limited guidance on the climate’s response to rising carbon dioxide levels.
- Data aggregated over the continental U.S. show no significant long-term trends.
- While global sea levels have risen about 8 inches since 1900, current data don’t show a long-term trend.
- Various models complicate efforts to attribute climate change to human CO2 emissions.
- Overly aggressive policies aimed at reducing emissions could do more harm than good by hiking the cost of energy and degrading its reliability.
Besides this report, we also have the U.S. administration that is contrary to carbon emission having stated that climate change is a hoax. And even beyond that, President Trump is coaxing countries to object to any climate change policies. China, on the other hand, while being the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitter, has been lauded for hitting its green energy targets five years earlier than expected, and it is committed to reducing its peak emission 5-7% by 2035.
It seems to me that as long as there are two sides to this climate change issue, it is not going to be resolved, and the entire world is going to suffer. And unfortunately, it will start with developing countries as they contribute the least to climate change but could suffer the most.
The only answer is that we all agree that climate change (global warming) is a major issue that must be addressed as soon as possible. The negatives of addressing climate change are minimal compared to the negatives of not addressing climate change. So let’s all agree we have a major problem and all agree to combat it.