Brother in arms
Of course climate change is inevitable. Even if we act as aggressively as we can, we will have about 1 degree C of global warming by 2100. It's honestly fairly likely that we will exceed 1.5 or even 2 degrees C.This got me thinking about a segment I watched on a tv show called The Newsroom here.
While the findings and reactions of the show are quite possibly, and quite probably, romanticized, you can't help but think. What if it's too late? Is climate change inevitable at this point? That's what I'm starting to think, because to reverse the trend at this point will basically never happen, due to the need for drastic and immediate changes to many Americans' lifestyles, and changes in several ways companies do business, which politicians in DC will never pass. Even someone like Bernie will roll back climate regulations when he gets a gigantic riot of angry citizens at his doorstep.
Why not do nothing to stop climate change, due to its inevitability, and just focus on preserving the natural resources of the United States? Curb all outflow from Hoover Dam, Grand Coulee Dam, etc. to build up reservoirs, stop outsourcing energy, increase solar+wind power, not as an alternative to fossil fuels but to supplement our energy supply. Stop food exports and flash freeze food to preserve perishables. Build up our military to protect our resources. Curb population growth to prevent depletion.
I'm actually 100% not joking here so someone respond to my batshit crazy idea before I start to put it into action please.
However, that's a terrible excuse not to act, and it's not a sustainable way of living. Scientific studies have shown time and time again that the actual economic costs of inaction will far exceed the costs of action. I am not saying that we shouldn't be aggressively thinking about adaptation strategies, but rather that action in response to climate change must include both adaptation and mitigation.
The main lifestyle changes that need to happen are embracing electric vehicles and public transportation, which is still in a horrendous state in many parts of the United States (particularly in Los Angeles where I currently live) as well as switching to carbon free energy sources to power our electric grid. In my view, the biggest reason that we have been unsuccessful in this pursuit is because the ones who would have to pay a large percentage of this cost are the rich and powerful, particularly those in the energy industry who insist that natural gas must be a transition source for the sake of maintaining their own profits. As we should have learned from this election, they are actively working behind the scenes to influence our politicians through their large campaign contributions so that climate change action is minimal (which is why the republicans deny science and the democrats pretend natural gas is a good thing while snubbing a carbon tax) and also fund multiple think tanks to continue to spread misinformation about a conclusion which scientists have reached a consensus on decades ago.