Till climate change related issues move from the periphery to electoral interest
Climate change is all about saving humanity and our ecosystem. The significant human cost due to failure to address the climate change related challenges is understood very well without any ambiguity.
For every 0.1 degrees of warming above present levels, about 140 million more people will be exposed to dangerous heat.
The high impact of climate change that causes rising global temperatures and heatwaves, fires, storms and floods hurting people today have been extensively documented by climate scientists. We are reading it everyday. So the awareness is there though it may not be enough.
Unfortunately, our climate scientists feel hopeless when they see that the responses from the politicians and the big corporations are not in the best interest of the common man. And yet, our climate scientists still passionately continue to do their job with a conviction that policymakers cannot say that they were not made aware.
The root cause that this impending catastrophe does not motivate politicians (policymakers) is that it is not an election issue. If policymakers are motivated enough, the big corporations will also act more responsibly. Elections are typically held every four to five years across the world, but the planning and execution cycles to contain climate change impacts are more than that. According to Stephen Humphreys, the politicians and the well healed won't be affected, even if there is a cataclysmic 3C rise, till there is civil disobedience.
Now India is no exception. During the ongoing 2024 parliamentary elections, no political party is explicitly talking about the devastating effects of climate crisis. Except the educated middle class and above, many of us do not fully understand the scientific phenomenon of climate change and its implications on our daily lives. This lack of awareness leads to climate change not influencing our voting decisions. But the issues related to its consequences, such as water scarcity, agriculture challenges, and economic impacts are being discussed aggressively.> Between 2016- 2021, climate extreme events caused damage to crops in over 36 million hectares, and a $3.75 billion loss for farmers in the country. If estimates from the report on ‘Loss and Damage Today’ by economist James Rising were to be believed, India lost 8% of its GDP in 2022.
Both the major political political parties, in India, have elaborately mentioned climate agenda in their election manifestos which are statement of intentions and not policy documents. However, Indian political parties tend to focus on immediate, emotive issues rather than long-term environmental concerns, which are not always seen as directly affecting voter in the short term. Environmental challenges and political priorities are consciously kept disconnected during election campaigns. No political party want to stir the hornet's best. Since meeting daily needs and economic growth are pressing concerns, the common people are prioritizing survival issues like employment, education, and healthcare over environmental policies.
The fate of climate change and politics is deeply intertwined. If climate issue fails to strike a strong resonance in the election campaigns across the globe, there is not much way forward.
Climate change is about saving the humanity and the corresponding ecosystem so that we people are saved. It is not about saving the planet which will change and continue. It is all about us.
@HardBeingGreen@joannejacobs they’ve found ways to not deal with it, even with a $44 billion budget for a nuclear waste dump.
‘Nuclear waste from today’s reactors will take thousands of years to become something safer to handle. So any solution can’t require too much stewardship. It’s gotta just work, and keep working for generations. By then, the utility that split those atoms won’t exist, nor will the company that designed the reactor. Who knows? Maybe the United States won’t exist either.
‘Right now, the US doesn’t have such a plan. That’s been the case since 2011, when regulators facing stiff local opposition pulled the plug on a decades-long effort to store waste underneath Yucca Mountain in Nevada, stranding $44 billion in federal funds meant for the job. Since then, the nuclear industry has done a good job of storing its waste on a temporary basis, which is part of the reason Congress has shown little interest in working out a solution for future generations. Long-term thinking isn’t their strong suit. “It’s been a complete institutional failure in the US.’