Two Million Animals Died, Next May Be Us
The seriousness of the issue can be seen in many cases where due to the climate change the life faced death. The race for modern development is inevitable but the process should be brought under check. The most powerful is unfortunately the big threat to the climate. Moreover, from individual to state and state to big organization, are the actors that are responsible for the protection of climate.
Consequences And Causes
The most important thing here to mention is that the changes in last few decades in climate are disastrous. For instance, the depletion of Ozone, acid rains and food shortages. Moreover, Health problems, affecting the wildlife and lack of pure drinking water.
- Ozone depletion is resulting into the global warming. This has caused several changes like disturbing the rain and snow patterns, stronger storms, rise in sea levels, warmer oceans, more droughts and wildfires. All these new trends in climate are the serious matters that will harm the life on the earth.
- The emission of fossil fuels and nitrogen oxide are resulting in Acid Rains. That is directly affecting the sea life and destroying the forest; the main source of rain.
- Animal or human survival is impossible without vegetables. Agricultural system has seen bad impacts after the climate change, the food is becoming a venom.
- There are several African states where there are health problems faced due to the climate change. The reason is that these third world countries are the places used for the industrial waste.
- The wildlife is the source of beauty and food (at the time of need). This has been greatly affected due to the climate change.
- Lack of clean drinking water availability is an emerging issue in most of the states. This problem is getting to a level where in coming years it can lead to a situation of war over water.
Those who are not being affected must keep this in mind that this change does not ask one's gender, cast or any other definition, it simply is a matter of life-and-death. The world must take a serious action in countering the emerging issues of climate change.
- The main focus of the world should be on the use of Renewable Resources. Those industries which are emitting fossil fuels should be brought under a check.
- All such machines and buildings that are emitting the Carbon Dioxide must be renovated. And the low energy technology should be introduced.
- The use of plastic bags must be eliminated and banned.
- There are 7.7 billion people living in world. According a report there were once 400 billion trees in the world and now only 3.04 billion trees exist. If half of the world population agrees on doing plantation, the issue of Climate Change can be minimized.
- The Industrial Waste must be tackled through recycling. The disposal of waste in seas and oceans should be banned.
- The protection of wild life is a serious matter. As their life is ensuring the human life.
In short, this must be kept in mind that the environment is essential for the life. That is to say, Climate Change is a threat to the existing creatures on earth. This issue must be sorted out before it get too serious.
Wee on April 20, 2021:
That is very important topic, especially these days COVID-19 is threatening the hole world. But Climate Change is also one major topic to be discussed. @Raja Adnan Afzal
Raja Adnan Afzal (author) from Rawalpindi, Pakistan on August 14, 2019:
I think we must appreciate the contribution of all states. And to deal with this problem we must show team work and cooperation. We are sharing a common air and common environment. All states are contributing to their level best. All are doing best to deal with the issue but where we lack is team work and cooperation.
Arthur Russ from England on August 13, 2019:
Brad, with reference to your valid comment of aviation being a major issue in respect to increasing air travel in the future and planned expansion of air ports (including Heathrow in London) leading to burning even more fossil fuels [if nothing is done].
The video below gives a frank view on the current status of research and development for commercial electric passenger planes, and the possible future direction for a greener airspace around the world.
Is ELECTRIC AIRCRAFT the FUTURE of AVIATION? https://youtu.be/WdHHexz_TpE
Arthur Russ from England on August 12, 2019:
Brad, yep China’s 2,000 year old silk road stretching 8,000 miles, has been rebuilt (road & rail) and as from January 2017 stretches all the way to London, England.
The new silk road by train between China and Britain is a lot quicker and cheaper than by cargo ship, and therefore of great benefit to trade between China and Europe; to the benefit of everyone.
The first train (on the new Silk Road) to make the 7,400-mile journey from China to London (Jan 2017): https://youtu.be/4Y9nfWXywMs
Arthur Russ from England on August 12, 2019:
Thanks Ken for your frank response; and of course you know America better than I do, so I respect your comments.
Arthur Russ from England on August 12, 2019:
Yep Brad, I cited the UK as ‘an example’ because that’s where I live and therefore I can talk about it authoritatively from my own personal knowledge and experience. But it is just an example e.g. while Britain is a world leader in offshore windfarms, Scotland is the world leader in research and development of tidal and wave turbines, just as China is a world leader in the research and development of solar panels.
Furthermore, obviously it’s not just China and the UK leading the way in Research and Development in new technologies for Renewable Energy; many countries around the world, particularly in Europe (population of over half a billion), are investing in their own research and development projects for a cleaner and more sustainable future. For example, Denmark is making a major contribution, and has ambitious plans to play a major role in the building of Dogger Bank Island to supply 100 million people with renewable energy.
Just last year the European Parliament approved plans for six European nations to jointly build an artificial island in the north sea between Britain and Norway (Dogger Bank), which on completion would Generate enough Renewable Energy to meet the needs of 100 million citizens; with Denmark being one of the six European countries playing a major role in its development.
A 'wind power hub' (Dogger Bank Island) to supply 100 million European people with renewable energy (with Denmark being one of the key players): https://youtu.be/gBJka-f8ixw
Yep, ‘planes’ is an issue, and one that hasn’t gone unnoticed. FYI there is a currently lot of Research and Development in this area e.g. striving to achieve commercially viable passenger airliners that are powered by electric. Its early days yet (a lot of research still needs to be done), but some of the prototypes are encouraging. The UK’s recent legal commitment to ‘net zero carbon’ by 2050 has already spurred on some airliners in doubling their efforts in finding solutions because come 2050, if they don’t make their service ‘greener’, they face the prospect of either having their service restricted over the UK airspace or they will need to offset their ‘carbon’ usage e.g. by paying to plant more trees to compensate.
Yep, I know that Asia and China are developing nations, and as such are becoming more reliant on fossil fuels while they industrialise and roll out ‘Renewable Energy’ technologies simultaneously; this aspect I covered in my original comment in this article. It takes time for any bit country to switch over to ‘Renewable Energy’, China is installing on average 2 new wind turbines per hour, and Britain is installing one new wind turbine per day; I don’t think either country could roll out new wind turbines any quicker than it’s currently achieving.
Yep, I know the USA train network sucks compared to other parts of the world like China and Europe; Europe has a sophisticated train network far superior to the USA. High speed passenger trains have been the norm across Europe for decades, 200mph being the norm e.g. the Eurostar which links London with Brussels, Rotterdam and Paris has reached speeds of 219mph.
The UK started its programme of railway electrification in 2009, and although it’s not complete, significant progress has been made. However, in 2015 China developed the technology to make hydrogen trains commercially viable, and by 2020 will be running hydrogen trains on 1,200 miles of railway track. Germany became the 2nd country in the world to commercially run hydrogen trains; and as from the 20th June this year Britain ran its 1st (of many) hydrogen trains. Although large sections of the UK train tracks have been electrified (and now running electric trains); hydrogen trains are a lot cheaper than electric trains to deploy on an existing network that hasn’t been electrified because they don’t need the initial expense of electrifying the track. So in the UK hydrogen trains will now be used to replace the diesel trains on railway lines that have not yet been electrified.
UK’s 1st Hydrogen Train: https://youtu.be/dTNxIN7aPSc
Ken Burgess from Florida on August 12, 2019:
Which nation is more in debt, America or China?
Which nation is the world's leading producer of high tech goods, America or China?
Which nation has a focused populace and is putting trillions into its infrastructure and new technologies development, America or China?
Betting on China to beat the U.S. is not defeatist... recognizing that our country is on the decline and that D.C. is corrupt and dysfunctional and sold out America to China and the U.N. decades ago... is comprehending the reality we are in, nothing more.
Its nothing more than a math problem to me, add up all the factors and come up with the answer. Its not a sports game. I am not rooting for a team to win... I am not dissing this nation for that one.
Ken Burgess from Florida on August 12, 2019:
Arthur I commend your belief and your actions (sustaining garden, pro active support of renewable energy).
I don't believe your views on how the Paris Agreement would have impacted America or how the politics play out here is entirely accurate, but its a moot point, as you say, America has ceded over to China the leading role in Renewable Energy and EV evolution, along with most other high tech advances to be forthcoming.
America, if you hadn't noticed, is devolving into a fractured state incapable of unifying behind anything on a national level... at a time when ultra national nations like China are taking the lead, and investing heavily into their futures.
Brad on August 12, 2019:
What is the global implementation since Kyoto and the Paris Accord?
And you cite the UK?
As what is the result of the Paris Accord which includes over the global countries.
China and India are spending a $100 Trillion on infrastructure that includes more roads, more high rise building and expanding and building new and larger airports. Jets run on fossil fuels a lot of fossil fuel. They also deposit their exhaust in the air where the AGW claims is the reason that the Climate is changing.
I don't see any change now, plan or in the future to stop air travel. The current expansion of airports is planned well in the future, with some talking about 2050 and further to even 2100.
We are increasing world population by a billion in the near future, with an expected population of more than 10 billion people.
Asia which includes India and China are developing technology nations and the bulk of their existing population has not been exposed to using the benefits of fossil fuel, but it is increasing all the time. They are building huge roads in China and Russia that immediately became gridlocked. That gridlock is going world wide and it wastes fossil fuels.
In the US we have failed to make use of the electric high speed train. CA is inept at doing projects, much less planning and budgeting the design and implementation of high speed rail.
The route would have connected the highly dense populations of Southern California, and Northern California. This would have been an accomplishment for the solutions needed for AGW.
NYC that was flooded in 2012 has not implemented any real protection from another superstorm such as Sandy.
I asked you for what the Paris Accord has implemented and you give me the UK and its population of 66 million people to gauge what is going on in a world of over 7 Billion people and counting?
Arthur Russ from England on August 09, 2019:
Sorry Brad, but the Paris Agreement has had a massive impact around the world, except for in the USA e.g. 35.8% of the UK’s electricity now comes from Renewable Energy, and the British Government is committed to being ‘carbon net neutral’ by 2050; whereas 6 years ago only 11.3% of the UK’s electricity was Renewable Energy.
In April 2017 the UK went for a full 24 hours, for the first time since the Industrial Revolution, without burning any coal. And in May this year the UK went a whole week without burning any coal; with the intention to close its last coal power station by 2025.
April 2017 the UK has had its first coal free day since the industrial revolution: https://youtu.be/IvYFP6N-kxw
Brad on August 09, 2019:
You didn't answer my comment. do you think this is TV jeopardy and I have to say it in the form of a ?
32 hours ago
And yet Consensus at the Paris Accord is only a consensus, but it has not implemented any action to solving the alleged problem."
Arthur Russ from England on August 09, 2019:
Ken, neither of the two links you provided, that purports to debunk Anthropogenic Climate Change, the ‘American Thinker’ and ‘Principia Scientific International’ are a reliable source of information.
The magazine ‘American Thinker’ has been described as a conservative blog. On close examination of the Article, all the links are too spurious and meaningless sources; a common tactic used in Conspiracy-Pseudoscience publications.
For an example one paragraph in the American Thinker article reads:-
“An article in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Astrophysics and Space Science last month warns that the solar minimum might already have begun. Its authors also say there is a high possibility that it will be even colder than those of the Little Ice Age.”
But if you actually follow the link to the referenced article (which few people do), then contrary to the claim made in the American Thinker, the Astrophysics and Space Science Article does NOT give any warnings, and neither is there any mention of [the earth] becoming colder than the ‘Little Ice Age’; in fact there is no mention of the earth’s temperature or any mention of Ice Ages in the so called source article.
As regards to your second link ‘Principia Scientific International’; then by browsing their websites Home Page, it should be obvious to anyone with a bit of savvy that it’s another ‘Fake News’ site e.g. packed with Conspiracy-Pseudoscience Articles. And ‘Fact Checking’ the website confirms this: - https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/principia-scientifi...
As Regards Meat Products, and their impact on Climate Change, it’s been well publicised (frequently) in the UK over the last year; so I am fully aware of the facts, and I fully agree with you that people should eat less meat (and junk food) to further help reduce the release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. I also agree with you that deforesting the Amazon forest is further harming the planet.
I am a vegetarian, and we grow all our own vegetables in our back garden (except potatoes) to feed us 12 months of the year, and also I harvest most of our own summer fruits from the garden for 4 months of the year; and we never eat junk food e.g. McDs. So we are doing our bit in this respect.
As regards deforesting the Amazon Jungle, that is a serious problem that isn’t being resolved; but which needs to be. For the UK to achieve its net zero target by 2050, it’s anticipated that we will need to plant 3 billion trees over an area of 70,000 hectares (270 square miles). For this to be achieved, we will need to plant trees at twice our current rate of tree planting; which is doable.
But I think the point you’re missing is that just eating less meat and planting more trees, by itself, isn’t going to solve the problem of Global Warming e.g. livestock farming accounts for just 18% of the greenhouse gases; the other 82% (including fossil fuel cars) still has to be curbed or compensated for to achieve ‘net zero’ targets by 2050, as a concerted effort to limit Global Warming. The Global figure of 13% for Transport is still significant; and in Industrialised countries (where there’s a higher number of cars) like the USA and UK that percentage is much higher. Therefore to tackle Climate Change, as well as eating less meat we do need to also reduce our reliance on fossil fuels, including switching from fossil fuel cars to electric cars etc.
In respect to your last paragraph, the UK is banning fossil fuel cars from 2040, as just one of many initiatives to reduce our carbon footprint; and in tandem to that the UK Government is running a series of publicity campaigns to encourage people to eat less meat.
As regards good farming practices to minimise the negative impact of farming (animal and crop alike) on the Environment and atmosphere, across Europe and in the UK we have far stricter controls and Standards than in the USA; and more and more farms across Europe and in the UK are converting to Organic Farming, which is good for the Environment and wildlife.
A Day in the Life of an Organic Farmer in the UK: https://youtu.be/QH9BxKNh73w
Ken Burgess from Florida on August 09, 2019:
Some interesting reads on the matter:
Below is the type of site that supports your viewpoint:
And below are sites that don't:
Here is something that IS caused by humans and DOES contribute to climate change far more than cars:
Our industrialized processing of meat products, including clear cutting and water pollution is doing more harm to our planet than cars.
The U.N. and the American government should be focusing people on eating less, eating salads and fruits more and avoiding McDs, if we stopped eating cows and stopped clearcutting the Amazon forest so they could have more grazing land for their Cows... this would do more to save the planet than doing away with all the ICE cars in the world.
I have no problem with efforts to reduce CO and pollution, I think its a good cause, I just think its way too politicized, and being given way too much credit for the problems we face, while we ignore entirely things like industrialized meat processing and its impact.
Arthur Russ from England on August 09, 2019:
Ken, the USA stands alone in the world in disbelieving the Scientists. The scientists are not idiots; they’ve taken all natural phenomena’s and cyclic phases of the earth’s orbit around the sun (all of which have an effect on climate) into account.
Scientists are also fully aware that there is also a direct relationship between the amount of greenhouse gases in the upper atmosphere and Global temperatures. Scientists are also fully aware of how much CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) are being released into the atmosphere by man, and its effects on Global Temperatures.
With reference to your last paragraphs, the American Government (Trump) is the only country in the world who debunks Anthropogenic Climate Change, but then again Trump believes Climate Change is ‘Fake News’ being spread by China!
On the other hand the Governments in the rest of the world are taking Anthropogenic Climate Change seriously, and are doing what they can to meet or exceed the UN (United Nations) Targets set by the Paris Agreement.
The original target was to be 20% reliant on Renewable Energies by 2020, 30% by 2030 and 80% by 2050. The EU has already exceeded the 2020 target (with several EU counties, including Scotland already almost 100% reliant on Renewable Energy) so in the last year the EU set its own new targets to be near 100% reliant on Renewable Energy by 2050.
In 2009, 6.7% of the UK’s electricity was from Renewable Energy.
In 2012, 11.3% of the UK’s electricity was from Renewable Energy.
In 2019 (currently) 35.8% of the UK’s electricity is from Renewable Energy, almost double its original target under the Paris Agreement (and that figure is increasing daily as more and more wind turbines come on line).
Scotland produces so much Renewable Energy that it now exports more than 28.9% of its surplus power.
So it is only America who is in denial of man’s devastating effects on Climate Change.
Fossil Fuel Free Plan by 2050 Will Affect Everyone in the UK: https://youtu.be/8icJ9LL3SkM
World's First Hydrogen-Powered Seagoing Ferries (in Scotland): https://youtu.be/jsbObSYqVao
Aberdeen, Scotland's Hydrogen Strategy - Leading the UK in H2: https://youtu.be/XBJAM1epr5c
Brad on August 08, 2019:
And yet Consensus at the Paris Accord is only a consensus, but it has not implemented any action to solving the alleged problem.
Ken Burgess from Florida on August 08, 2019:
The "hottest days on record" is not entirely accurate.
The point being, while I fully agree that we should learn to curb our pollution, including the plastics poisoning the oceans, and the fracking polluting our drinkable water sources... I don't think we can do diddly to stop "global warming".
I think it is arrogance or wanton ignorance that makes people ignore both the historical proofs that show the world goes through hot and cold phases, and that things totally beyond our control, like the sun's cycles, the earth's shifting rotation around the sun, the earth's magnetic field which is currently moving at 60 miles a year and causing us to recalculate our GPS... I guess its scary to consider the fact that we are not in control of our world's climate, or its future, and we can't do anything about it if the Polar Shift occurs or a Giant Solar Flare happens to be aimed right at the Earth.
So I am all for renewable energy, doing away with fracking and ICE vehicles, but I also recognize that we stay with oil more to keep the global economy going (what will Iran, Saudi Arabia, Russia, etc. do to generate income for the billion people dependant upon oil for their income/support?)
But I don't think it will save our planet from destruction, I think we may be fated for destruction no matter what, that it is cyclical, and this too can be seen in historical facts.
Puma Punku, Gobekli Tempe, Baalbek, etc. it is a recognized fact (if not one that is cited in public by any mainstream sources) that there was a human civilization that spanned the globe over 12,000 years ago, that got wiped out by a catastrophic event. There is speculation that this has occurred more than once, but I don't like speculation, I like evidence and facts, what is provable beyond doubt today, is that a highly advanced and global civilization existed more than 12 thousand years ago, and it got wiped from history.
My problem with the Paris Agreement, and some of the legislation proposed here in America... is that its all about taxation and control... our politicians have proven time and again that they serve the international corporation and banking sector's interests, their Green New Deal efforts put a lot of emphasis on their being able to control our lives and take our income, and little in the way of concrete solutions or viable planning.
Its not that there aren't problems that should be addressed... its that politicians are using these problems to convince the populace to allow themselves to be enslaved, rather than actually do something to address the matters on a global scale.
Proof is in the pudding... if the government really wanted to do something, why don't they have a fleet of EV vehicles rather than ICE vehicles?
Why don't they subsidize the efforts of companies like Tesla to build a national infrastructure of recharge stations?
Why aren't they subsidizing companies to build solar and wind farms, rather than subsidizing oil companies?
Arthur Russ from England on August 07, 2019:
Thanks for your comments Ken. Tackling Climate Change is the important thing; curbing ‘Global Warming’ is in everyone’s interest, including America’s; and that’s why the Paris Agreement is so important e.g. it’s an International Commitment by all to achieve targets in reducing CO2 emissions as a common worldwide goal.
Theresa May has taken the commitment one step further when in June this year she made the UK becoming ‘net zero’ Carbon Emissions by 2050 ‘LAW’ (a legal requirement under UK law rather than just a Government Target); the only country in the world to enshrine the goals of the Paris Agreement into law. This legal commitment will affect every UK citizen and every UK Business e.g. everyone in the UK will have to think about buying 100% electric cars soon, and I like everyone else in the UK will need to start thinking about replacing our ‘Gas’ Central Heating Boilers with either electric or hydrogen boilers.
Across the globe, the past 5 years have been the hottest five years on record. Therefore ‘Time to Take Action’ is ‘Running Out’.
In the UK, the hottest 10 years on record have all occurred since 2002; and we are not just talking about a degree or two. Prior to the 1990s, in southern England we’d be lucky if our summer temperatures reached 25c (77f), and they never reached 30c (86f); whereas in the last few year’s summer heatwaves, with temperatures above 35c (95f) has become the norm, and this year it almost reached 40c (104f).
Extreme weather 2018 - Taking its toll (UK): https://youtu.be/ybCa9hAlf0s
Brad on August 07, 2019:
"Ken: All 197 countries that are part of the UN (except the USA) have either signed or acceded to the Paris Agreement; which is virtually the whole world. "
And since AGW became a known problem can you list what has been DONE besides a consensus.
China is building coal plants to produce electricity.
Mega infrastructure is spending more than a Trillion dollars around the world and especially in China.
Consensus is an agreement, but what has been accomplished in achieving a solution to the problem mentioned in the consensus.
Not much that I can see?
Ken Burgess from Florida on August 07, 2019:
All good facts, I am not saying that China is not making great strides, or that the EU isn't.
What I was referring to, was what the Paris Accord did or did not do.
If America's leadership wisened up, and supported EV and Renewable Energy efforts like the Chinese government does, that would be great. If the U.S. poured money into infrastructure for EV vehicles and wind power that would be great.
That is a separate matter, you mentioned the U.S. pulling out of the Paris Agreement, and I said rightfully so, any American President looking out for America's best interests would have done so, for reasons I mentioned, here and elsewhere.
Arthur Russ from England on August 06, 2019:
Ken: All 197 countries that are part of the UN (except the USA) have either signed or acceded to the Paris Agreement; which is virtually the whole world. The USA did sign it, but as we know, Trump has since withdrawn from the Agreement. SO AMERICA STANDS ALONE.
Before you go blaming China (as most Americans do) the biggest Carbon Emissions is China and the USA. However, in terms of CO2 emissions per capita, China is only ranked 47th worst offender in the world, at 7.5 metric tonnes per capita; while the USA is ranked 11th at 16.5 per capita. However, the population size in the other 10 counties where their Carbon Emissions per capita is higher than the USA are only small countries; thus making the USA the worst offender.
China’s population is over 4 times larger than the USA, therefore even if the Chinese produced just a quarter of the Carbon Emissions per person than the average American, their Carbon Emission for the country as a whole would still be more than America’s.
The USA population is 327 million.
The EU population is 513 million.
China’s population is 1,380 million.
The reason China is still highly dependent on burning coal is because unlike the USA and the EU (who are developed countries) China is in a transition period from an Agricultural county to becoming an Industrialised country.
The rate at which China is deploying new wind turbines and solar panels is phenomenal. China is erecting 2 new wind turbines per hour; which dwarfs UK’s progress of erecting an average of one new wind turbine per day.
Why China has become the World Leader in Renewable Energy: https://youtu.be/ZSRg-hMYi9Q
China is on course to ban all fossil fuel cars by 2030 (replacing them with 100% electric cars); which is better than the UK, where fossil fuel cars will not be banned until 2040.
Also, the EU is weaning itself off of coal, in the UK 67% of our electricity came from coal in 1990. In 2016 our reliance on coal for electricity was down to just 22%. Now it’s less than 2% and falling rapidly, with the last of our coal power stations scheduled to close in 2025. And that’s in spite of the fact that Britain is sitting on 200 years of coal reserves that we’ve stopped mining.
Where the USA is losing out are all the job and business opportunities that the Renewable Energy Revolution is generating. Scotland, who is sitting on 62% of Europe’s oil reserves, 12% of Europe’s gas reserves and 69% of the UK’s coal reserves has banned fracking and embraced the Renewable Energy Revolution to such an extent that they now produce more Renewable Energy than they need and export the surplus to England. And in the process of embracing these new technologies the Scottish economy is benefitting from all the investment in the Research and Development that goes with it e.g. generating new businesses and employment.
By the time America wakes up to the fact that fossil fuels is killing the planet (if it’s not too late, which is debatable) then the USA will end up importing most of the solar panels and wind turbines from China and Europe (where they are currently being developed), and all the associated technologies, skills and expertise, rather than being in at the start and contributing to the Research and Development as China and Europe are currently doing.
The World’s Largest Offshore Wind Farm: https://youtu.be/rbnlJOEQ9Hc
Raja Adnan Afzal (author) from Rawalpindi, Pakistan on August 05, 2019:
@Ken Burgess that is the reason I did not mentioned neither the Paris Agreement and nor the name of any State. What I am saying is whether it is United States or China or any other state who is emitting the harmful gases, is involved in changing the Climate patterns. Where I focused is that all the states are created by the societies which are build by the humans. For whom the climate is common. So every state have to come at the same platform to tackle the issue which is created by the contribution of all, including us. At many points every individual is harming the environment. Vehicles and all other machines are also playing their roles in Climate Change.
And I Agree with you as well. Thanks for your precious time for reading my Article.
Ken Burgess from Florida on August 05, 2019:
Arthur what was the Paris Agreement?
Who did it target?
Who was exempt?
China, now the world's largest manufacturing and industrialized nation burns more coal than the rest of the world combined.
"China’s large manufacturing-based economy has primarily been fueled by coal. From 1990 to 2015, China increased its coal consumption from 1.05 billion tons to 3.97 billion tons. In 2016, coal made up 62 percent of China’s energy use. Since 2011, China has consumed more coal than the rest of the world combined."
The Paris Agreement was unfair because it allows others (China, India, EU) to build coal-fired power plants, but not the USA.
The Paris Agreement should have been called, the stick-it-to-America agreement, and any sensible President should have walked away from it.
Raja Adnan Afzal (author) from Rawalpindi, Pakistan on August 05, 2019:
Yes, the power politics among states is actually leading us all to get indulged in an environment where we are destroying the Climate and actually killing ourselves.
Arthur Russ from England on August 05, 2019:
Yep, I fully agree with you; and that's why I am peeved that Trump pulled the USA out of the Paris Agreement. With America ignoring the problem it means the rest of the world has to work far harder to try to save the Planet.
Jawad on August 04, 2019:
Good one, a great source of knowledge.
Raja Adnan Afzal (author) from Rawalpindi, Pakistan on August 04, 2019:
@Nathanville I agree with you about the job of Europeans and yes what Europe is doing is very appreciate able. But what I want to convey is that the world need to come at a same platform as if a pollution raised by some other state it can enter in the European environment without any permission. So, it is a matter where each country need to be on the same platform. And the Climate is common to all. No one owns its. Well about the trees I agree on that 400 trillion and 3.04 trillion trees comment.
I liked your comment and the suggestion. Thanks for giving your precious time in reading my article.
Arthur Russ from England on August 04, 2019:
Europe is with you. The EU is on course to meet, if not exceed, the Paris Agreement on Climate Change by 2050; a Policy goal the EU was already following many years before the International Agreement was signed. The UK has gone one step further by not only ‘Declaring a State of Climate Emergency’ on 2nd May 2019, but also in June of this year the UK was the first major country in the world to actually make ‘net zero’ Carbon Emission by 2050 a LAW, rather than just Government Policy (a Target).
Part of the UK’s commitment to achieving ‘net zero’ Carbon Emissions’ by 2050 requires planting an estimated 3 billion trees (over an area of 70,000 hectares (270 square miles)), which is double our current rate of reforestation; but it is an achievable target.
In reading your article I did note that you quoted 400 billion and 3.04 billion trees; it should read 400 trillion and 3.04 trillion. The 3 billion trees the UK plans to plant as part of its strategy to make the UK carbon neutral is only a drop in the ocean but at least we are committed to doing what we can to save the planet.