To save climate and future – an utopy?
Climate change can’t be stopped? The politicians are bargaining the acceptable degree of damaging the climate.
Our future deserves an appropriate level of discussion. There are no climate concepts or solutions that evoke confidence or even enthusiasm
The sabotage of climate protection.
The climate is ill, and goes to the doctor. Instead of explaining the most efficient therapies, he conceals them with incomprehensible and never ending terminologies. Until poor climate accepts sadly, that there is no hope.
Climate protection is not working
… because we don`t ask why it doesn’t.
…and because we don’t know the most efficient methods.
Plan A: A global forest protection law
To safe the climate seems only impossible because we do not realise how simple it would be.
From the scientific point of view, it would be very easy:
Up to 24 million hectares of forests are destroyed every year, often tropical rainforests that incorporate up to 500 tonnes of carbon per hectare.
A global forest destruction ban would save more than 8 Gt C per year. . 8 Gt C= 8 Billion Tones of carbon = 30 Billion Tones of CO2)
The annual increase in carbon in the atmosphere is 5 Gt C. (= 18,5 Gt CO2)
This one single law would stop global warming.
Land use – a “forgotten” climatic key factor
If it is as easy as that to stop climate change, why don’t we do it?
The concept “biomass instead CO2” once got ratified by most countries, and then went …. forgotten.
This win-win-solution got eliminated from the climate discussion.
By whom?
By those groups that will reject also in future a global forest protection law.
Their catalogue of cheap excuses:
• “We need land for fodder” … for XXL steaks.
• “We need land for agrar-fuel”… for XXL cars.
• “The compliance of a global forest protection can’t be controlled!” Computer programs are able to detect forest destruction by satellite images.
• “But the poor people!?” Agroforestry, the traditional, tropical forest garden for fruit and spice production, generates a much higher income per hectare than a pasture or a soybean field.
• “But the poor developing countries!?” The coalition of the rainforest nations agreed long ago to protect their forests thanks to fair compensations such as a debt cancellation-
The crucial question.
“Forest and future of mankind should not be protected by laws!?” .
If you park wrong, you get fined. .
The destruction of climate and humanity however is not even forbidden. .
Where there is no will, there is no way. The demand for a global forest law is the crucial question, revealing the real priorities of politicians, opinion leaders and influencers, and exposing greenwashers. .
Politicians must realize and agree that the “right on profits” is not a human right. The right on life for future generations however is the most fundamental one. .
The CO2 content of the atmosphere has increased by a third since the beginning of industrialization, the current annual increase of 5 Gt C is dramatic.
Conflict of interest.
Why does the IPCC calculate in Pg, in petagrams? 1 petagram corresponds to 1 quadrillion grams, i.e. 1,000,000,000,000,000 grams. Why are calculations on the level of a planet, enormous quantities, calculated in grams?
1 Pg =1 Gt: (1 petagram = 1 gigaton, 1 billion tons, a far more comprehensible formulation) .
It is naïve to assume that the all-powerful arsonists/fossil industries are not trying to to take maximum advantage of the fire brigade/IPCC.
In the IPCC agricultural reports, organic agriculture does not even exist, nor does its excellent climate records. Despite the devastating climate impacts of industrial agriculture, they propagate the climate „protection“ methods of pesticides, GMOs, artificial irrigation and fertilisers.